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

Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

    http://grantland.com/the-triangle/si...all-on-lebron/

    Greetings from Indiana, the home of Larry Legend, Jimmy Chitwood, St. Elmo’s, the Indy 500 and a relentlessly confusing Pacers team. Two years ago, Indianapolis hosted the Super Bowl and exceeded everyone’s expectations (including mine), handling the crush of people with ease while somehow maintaining a homey feel. I loved that entire week … you know, right until Brady overthrew a wide-open Welker by maybe 15 inches for the clinching touchdown, then the Patriots blew another Super Bowl to the freaking Giants. Aaaaaaaargh.

    If only sports fans could swallow pills to erase specific plays from their brains like they were Eternal Sunshine characters. I will never stop seeing Welker line up for that play, with New York’s secondary in chaos as their D-backs scrambled to figure out their coverage. Inexplicably, they abandoned the entire left side of the field and left it that way. They should have just planted the Lombardi Trophy in the corner of the end zone with a sign that said, “WELKER — THIS IS YOURS.”

    Welker noticed immediately. Brady noticed, too. Since it happened right in front of us, my buddy Jamie and I both noticed and started furiously elbowing each other. Every Giants fan in our section noticed and started shrieking in disbelief. For about five seconds there, we were going to avenge the Helmet Catch game. I can’t spend time in Indianapolis without drifting back to those five seconds, and the beauty of the day itself — how we kicked things off by driving to the Hoosiersgym (just two days after taping a podcast with Larry Legend), how the sun never stopped shining, how Indianapolis never stopped radiating good vibes. Everything was perfect. I still can’t believe we lost.

    Twenty-seven months later, I can’t believe the Pacers have a chance to derail LeBron’s three-peat. When we were in New Orleans for All-Star Weekend, the Pacers had won 40 of 52 games and loomed as a legitimate contender. Their best five guys played better together than anyone else’s best five guys. Roy Hibbert had blossomed into this generation’s Dikembe. Paul George was filming commercials and getting “superstar” buzz. The immortal Lance Stephenson was everyone’s favorite All-Star snub. I remember running into Frank Vogel, whom I’ve known since his Boston days, and he couldn’t have seemed happier about everything. Loved his team, loved the landscape, loved their title chances, loved everything. He couldn’t stop smiling.

    That’s what made the next few weeks so incomprehensible. We covered Indiana’s demise in painstaking detail on Grantland, as Vogel slowly became more intense than Michael Fassbender during the last 40 minutes of Shame, but nobody could answer the fundamental question: “WHAT HAPPENED???” During their embarrassing Round 1 series against the undermanned Hawks, I created a pie chart of blame: Pat Riley’s Disease of Me (30 percent); too many minutes for the worn-down starting five (20 percent); no incumbent superstar who could say “Don’t worry, I got this” (10 percent); Lance Stephenson being the one saying, “Don’t worry, I got this” (20 percent); and maybe-they-weren’t-that-good-to-begin-with (20 percent). Hibbert’s unexpected transformation into Hasheem Thabeet didn’t crack the pie chart. Neither did their broken chemistry, which I described as “they’re interacting like divorced parents who just ran into each other at their son’s youth soccer game.” Everything looked bad. Everything.

    And you know what? They were ready to roll over in Atlanta, in Game 6, when they trailed by five with 3:15 remaining. You always have those playoff games when things look bleak, and everyone glances around and wonders, Who’s saving us right now? For Indiana, that guy isn’t Paul George — it’s David West. West drew a foul and made both free throws, stole the ball from Pero Antic on the next possession, then drained a 19-footer to pull them within one. They were fine after that. One round later, against a scary Washington team that’s probably still kicking itself for squandering that series, Indy blew a sizable Game 6 lead in the fourth quarter. West sank the crucial jumper to grab the lead back, then swished three other shots to ice the series.
    Quick tangent: These last few years saw something of a sea change in NBA philosophies, driven by the advanced-metrics boom and an increasing number of new owners with hedge fund backgrounds. With a philosophical battle brewing between the old-school Eye Test guys and the new-wave numbers guys, it’s been funny (and a little ridiculous) to watch this turn into an either/or thing. Ideally, you should blend both worlds into one larger vision — that’s one of many reasons why San Antonio keeps thriving even with Duncan heading toward his 40th birthday. The Spurs value the new-wave thinking (for instance, they mastered corner 3s before just about everyone else) while also putting significant stock in personalities and chemistry. Gregg Popovich has done everything short of admitting publicly, I like having as many foreign guys as possible, they’re wired differently, they actually know how to play basketball, they didn’t just pop out of some AAU factory like the rest of these schmucks.

    On the flip side, you have the 2014 Rockets, a team that made sense on paper and executed a vision that looked great on paper — one big guy, lots of shooters, lots of 3s — only they never solved their fundamental Eye Test issues. Can you really win a title when your best two players aren’t leaders? Can you really throw out chemistry and assume math will carry you for four rounds? The Rockets blew multiple close games against Portland for a variety of reasons, but mainly because they didn’t have anyone like West — the seen-it-all veteran who would have made those three or four we’re-screwed-if-someone-doesn’t-score-right-now jumpers, told Dwight to stop *****ing, yelled “GET YOUR HEAD INTO THE SERIES, WE F—ING NEED YOU!” at James Harden, and grabbed Chandler Parsons’s jersey in the final second of Game 6 and said calmly, “If there’s a switch and you let Lillard get a wide-open 3, I’m beating you to death.”

    There aren’t a lot of these guys left — reliable veterans who aren’t the team’s best player but carry inordinate sway and thrive when their team needs them most. Over the past 20 years, these guys ranged in all shapes and sizes. Hakeem’s Rockets had Sam Cassell and Mario Elie. Shaq’s Lakers had Brian Shaw, Rick Fox and Derek Fisher. The mid-2000s Pistons had Chauncey Billups. The 2008 Celts had Eddie House and James Posey. The 2011 Mavs had Jason Kidd and Jason Terry. These last two Miami teams had Mike Miller, Udonis Haslem and Shane Battier. Other than West, what other non-superstar veterans currently fit that profile other than Paul Pierce? What in-their-prime guys could even sniff this conversation other than — maybe — Mike Conley, Kyle Lowry and Shaun Livingston? What younger guys could evolve into that role other than Reggie Jackson (an obvious candidate) and maybe Kemba Walker?

    I don’t know what happened to those guys, or even what we should call them. Soul Providers? Heart Transplants? Scrotal Enhancers? Whatever name you create, just know that West is the best of the bunch right now. He saved Indiana’s season for two straight rounds. And so I thought Miami would finish them off in Round 3, but I overlooked three things …

    1. The Pacers are an atrocious “Everyone Believes In Us!” team and an excellent “Nobody Believes In Us!” team.
    You could see it in Game 1 — they clearly relish being underdogs again. Even their fans relish it. Multiple Pacers fans yelled at me during Game 1, still angry that I picked Washington over them. An entire section to the right of our TV set even chanted “Simmons Sucks!” for a few seconds before switching gears and showering former Pacer Jalen Rose with love. I thought it was fantastic even as I started to secretly worry about the hotel chef dropping pubes in my scrambled eggs the next time I ordered room service. The Pacers have fantastic fans; they SHOULD take this stuff personally.
    But that’s the thing — these players and their fans are better off being angry, feeling like nobody believes in them, worrying about being the overlooked small market all over again and fretting that the other team’s superstar is always getting the calls. That’s their identity. That’s their DNA. Being the favorite, meeting a certain level of expectations, dealing with adversity, wearing that bull’s-eye all the time … maybe that’s not what they were meant to do. Can you imagine how these Pacers would have handled the V. Stiviano saga if Donald Sterling owned them (and not the Clippers)? Yikes. But none of that matters now. Nobody believes in them. They’re back to who they are.

    2. I never realized until the pregame introductions how much these Indiana fans hate Miami.
    This isn’t even good-natured “sports-hate,” a concept I tackled back in 2009 with Peyton Manning and Kobe Bryant — you can sports-hate a player or team without genuinely hating them. I sports-hate Peyton’s guts, but I don’t actually hate him, if that makes sense. Well, Pacers fans actually HATE the Heat. You could feel the hostility brewing during the pregame intros — “BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!” — and you could feel their collective animosity brewing every time a Miami player did something they didn’t like. When Mario Chalmers pushed C.J. Watson into the cameraman, they reacted like Little League parents who just watched the opposing coach shove a finger into their child’s chest. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
    And that’s a subtle but important difference between the first two rounds and Round 3 — you can’t work up that kind of enmity toward a 38-win Hawks team and the young upstart Wizards. You just can’t. Is that why Indiana went 3-4 at home in the first two rounds? Not entirely … but it certainly didn’t help. We know when the Pacers thrive: when they’re overachieving, when their fans are pushing them, when they can’t let themselves relax for even one second. All that prosperity handicapped them. It fundamentally changed who they were. It can’t be a coincidence that they played their most passionate basketball in three months on Sunday. Of course …

    3. Coming off three straight years in the Finals, Miami is more vulnerable than ever.
    That’s the real reason Indiana has a chance here — Miami whiffed on free agency with last offseason’s Oden-Beasley signings, leaving the Heat with an older, creakier version of last year’s championship team, which came within one rebound of losing in Game 6. You can’t look at a single Heat player and say, “That guy is better now than he was a year ago,” with the possible exception of Chris Andersen. Battier and Haslem look washed-up. Bosh morphed into a 3-point specialist who never posts up anymore. Ray Allen will give you two good games per series and that’s it. The Mario Chalmers–Norris Cole point guard combo is more unreliable than ever. Dwyane Wade isn’t a top-20 player anymore; if there was a startling revelation from Game 1, it’s that Lance Stephenson spent four quarters thinking to himself, I’m better than this guy … and he might not have been wrong.

    So it’s LeBron and LeBron and LeBron and also LeBron, and more than ever, LeBron. There’s a decent chance that the Pacers regained their mojo — much like a TV show that gets derailed by a stupid subplot for a few months, then the writers fix things and you’re suddenly saying, “Wow, that was easy, this show is really good again! We’re back!” Or maybe they’re just comfortable playing against Miami thanks to all the reps over these past two seasons — eight regular-season games, eight playoff games — and a matchup that’s strangely favorable for them.

    But yesterday’s game was eye-opening. We were reminded that Hibbert loves playing this team, that Miami doesn’t have anyone to defend West, that Paul George was created by scientists to defend LeBron (not stop him totally, but at least make him work), that Lance loves going at Wade, that George Hill can’t get exposed against that Chalmers-Cole combo. We were reminded that Bosh, for whatever reason, absolutely sucks against Indiana — we now have a 16-game sample size of Bosh averaging 11 and 4 against Hibbert and West (not a misprint). And we were reminded that, for Miami to advance, it’s going to take yet another superhuman effort from LeBron James. Maybe even a super-duperhuman effort. The Heat spent four years riding on LeBron, Wade, defense, Bosh and 3s, in that order … and right now, they can only count on LeBron from game to game. That’s pretty sobering.

    Can the Pacers keep the momentum going? Who the hell knows? It’s the Pacers! It’s like trying to guess the results of a roulette wheel. They could score 54 points in Game 2 and I wouldn’t be shocked. But if they can keep coming relatively close to that unexpected Game 1 performance, and if they can keep getting passionately insane crowds from the league’s best arena, this could turn frightening pretty quickly for Miami. Is LeBron having 2010 Cavs flashbacks? Does he have enough reserve strength to fight through a seven-game war and prevail on the road? Is his own version of Jordan’s Game 6 in Utah looming, when he has to effectively defeat an opponent by himself or lose out on a three-peat?

    I don’t have the answers. But when you’re in the home of the Basketball Jesus and Jimmy Chitwood and Bobby Knight and Bobby Plump and Norman Dale and Steve Alford and everyone else, with those fans going bonkers, and Larry Legend sitting there IN THE BUILDING? That’s when you don’t want to be an aging opponent looking for answers. Your move, LeBron.

    Peck and I have always agreed that one reason that Lebron and the Heat have more struggles in Indy is because they are genuinely disliked. Sure, they get their "boos" everywhere they go. However they are also accustomed to a certain amount of star chasing fans, Lebron in particular. You know the types, the guy who is there one night with the Kobe jersey on to cheer on the visiting Lakers and the next week is in the same spot with the Lebron jersey rooting for the visting Heat. Do we have those at the fieldhouse? Absolutely. But judging using purely the eye test, it has always seemed that those types don't seem as numerous for the Heat. There are no MVP chants while Lebron shoots free throws unlike when he plays in other arenas. There are no audible cheers that can be heard in the opening lineups (there are cheers but are smothered convincingly by the boos). Lebron is not Kobe, or MJ, or Bird. He has always seemed the type who is more comfortable being the hero, not the enemy. He wants to be liked. He does not get that in Indianapolis.
    Last edited by Diamond Dave; 05-19-2014, 10:53 PM.
    House Name: Pacers

    House Sigil:


    House Words: "We Kneel To No King"
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

    I hate agreeing with him.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

      LOL...Simmons being called out by Local Pacer fans during the game.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

        Simmons gets a lot of hate but he is probably my favorite sports writer. The dude is hilarious and at least admits that he is a homer(unlike every other commentator).

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

          Like seemingly everyone I have a love-hate thing with Simmons. I just don't get why one would waste such a good mind on being a sports journalist. Be a fan in your off hours and do something more important with your gift as a career.

          On the hatred for the Heat: It's all about the Decision being (1) a rejection of the Midwest for the East Coast Big City, and (2) such a rejection that was deliberately done in order to big-time the Midwest with some other big-time East Coast friends. I totally get that, and I even vibe with and semi-endorse that 'hatred' of the Heat. But also I immediately forgave LeBron for the Decision at the time. It was the kind of dumb thing that young people do because they are young and don't know any better, and we've all done such things. If I dislike the Heat it's because the team embodies the Decision. But I like LeBron James. He hasn't sulked. He has made the best of the bed he is lying in. He's an incredible player and from what little I know he seems like a decent person, if still probably with some residual confusions about priorities -- but in that he's no different from any of us who sit around and watch the NBA a bunch.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

            Wow, I don't like the guy that much, but that was a really good article, so he earned some respect there.
            Last edited by BlueCollarColts; 05-19-2014, 11:36 PM.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

              I really agree with his point:

              1. The Pacers are an atrocious “Everyone Believes In Us!” team and an excellent “Nobody Believes In Us!” team.

              This team just knows how to be great when they are underestimated.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                People hate the Heat collectively not one individual player. It's mainly because of the unfair advantage they have with an allstar team. We accepted that Jordan was a basketball deity, we respect the team concept of the Spurs and the Pistons, the Celtics had a big three but they were no way formidable to Miami's big three. We'll respect LeBron when he doesn't have superfriends and actually carries a team to a championship.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                  I could never stand the role players on the Jordan-era Bulls. Champions? Please. "Lucky folks" would be more appropriate.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                    Originally posted by eldubious View Post
                    People hate the Heat collectively not one individual player. It's mainly because of the unfair advantage they have with an allstar team. We accepted that Jordan was a basketball deity, we respect the team concept of the Spurs and the Pistons, the Celtics had a big three but they were no way formidable to Miami's big three. We'll respect LeBron when he doesn't have superfriends and actually carries a team to a championship.
                    To be fair, I think that he has been carrying the Team this year.

                    The rest of the Big 3 and the combined efforts of the Geriactric "Supporting Cast" show up from time to time ( like they used to ) and LeDecision isn't left out there to bear the weight of the entire Team by himself.

                    IMHO.....LeDecision can go all "super-human" on the Pacers and win a game all by himself. Can he do it for the entire 7 game series? I don't think he can. The question is whether the rest of the Heat can do enough over the course of a 7 game series to win the Series.

                    If the Pacers play like this for at least 2 more games....I think that they can weather whatever that the Heat can throw at them. Everything else will IMHO come down to some combination of Luck and whichever Team plays their best.
                    Last edited by CableKC; 05-20-2014, 12:22 AM.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                      Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
                      I really agree with his point:

                      1. The Pacers are an atrocious “Everyone Believes In Us!” team and an excellent “Nobody Believes In Us!” team.

                      This team just knows how to be great when they are underestimated.
                      Meh... To me, this is along the lines of a "we will just flip the switch" type of analogy... We will turn it on when no one believes in us?? I dont know if we are that good really...

                      I think that it is more along the lines that we have finally healed the wounds (what ever they were) and have focused on the game... I short sighted hope is that those wounds are healed enough to get us past Miami (Tuesday is HUGE) and to challenge SA (dont see anyway Thunder can stop TD)... My long term hope is that these wounds are able to be healed where we can keep this group together for the next few years...
                      Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                        Good article, though I'm not sure that Wade won't have great games this series.

                        The only issue with saying "Jordan didn't need a superteam" is that it vastly understates how good Scottie Pippen was.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                          Originally posted by Ransom View Post
                          The only issue with saying "Jordan didn't need a superteam" is that it vastly understates how good Scottie Pippen was.
                          and Rodman the 2nd 3 peat. Kukoc was no slouch either. it wasn't like Lebron in Cleveland or something.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            LOL...Simmons being called out by Local Pacer fans during the game.
                            He failed to point out that there were TWO sections chanting Simmons Sucks and then cheering for Jalen.....
                            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Bill Simmons Weighs in on Game One

                              How good was the Indy super bowl? Everybody forgets that there was actually some nasty cold rain the Saturday night before the game, that's how good the atmosphere was.


                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X