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

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    He led the entire league in triple doubles. He led this team in assists, rebounds and FG%. Why not give that guy more time to mature?

    The cold hard fact is that the Pacers knew when they drafted Lance in the second round after many other teams passed him up...that they'd have to baby sit him. They had Clark Kellogg and numerous vets around Lance early on. But they abandoned that. They didn't stop valuing him, but they did stop providing the type of support he needed. So it was all working and the final straw was moving Danny Granger for Evan Turner. The Pacers thought he had matured enough and they pulled the supports out too fast.

    I don't think many of you know this, but I was livid when Bird drafted Lance Stephenson. I thought Bird had not learned a single thing from the brawl years. But over time I could see the possibilities if Lance was given time to grow up. He has great skills and more ability than any Pacer including everyone except maybe Paul George. Keep in mind I was not happy with the pick because of the baggage. But Lance proved to grow up and I wanted to see that kid overcome it all. But the Pacers kicked the crutch out too soon. I suppose that shouldn't have been necessary, but the franchise signed up for it.
    Pacers offered a contract that they thought Lance was worth given the time, patience and resources it would take to hopefully a 24 year old quit acting like a baby.

    If Larry Bird and Michael Jordan can't get a 24 year old Lance to quit pouting, who can?

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Scott Fowler: Lance “Born Ready” Stephenson isn’t ready in Charlotte Hornets coach’s eyes

      http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...orn-ready.html

      We are only two games into it, but so far The Great Lance Stephenson Experiment has produced extremely uneven results. It’s not ready for prime time yet. On Saturday night, it was telling that Charlotte Hornets coach Steve Clifford ditched the experiment during the most critical part of the game.

      Stephenson, Charlotte’s major offseason acquisition, scored only two points in the Hornets’ 71-69 loss to Memphis Saturday night at home. And he was benched for the fourth quarter by a clearly frustrated Clifford.

      “I went with the team that was playing the best,” a testy Clifford said in his postgame news conference, several times pounding the table with his right hand for emphasis. “I’m going to coach to win.”

      Clifford said of Stephenson: “He just didn’t play very well. Look, he’s trying to find his rhythm. But we’ve got to be organized.”

      Stephenson did not lash back at his coach after hearing some of the postgame comments. He has shot 4-for-18 in the Hornets’ first two games, after all, and knows he is struggling. I asked him if he was frustrated, too.

      “I am frustrated, but that’s part of being a pro,” Stephenson said. “Just learning from your mistakes and getting better every time.”

      Stephenson played 27 minutes in the first three quarters and zero in the fourth. Charlotte shot 30.3 percent in the first three quarters and 56.3 percent in the fourth, when the Hornets nearly pulled off another late comeback. They ultimately fell short when Charlotte couldn’t score in the last 68 seconds – Al Jefferson got a bloody nose on what should have been a foul but instead became a traveling call – and the Hornets made a couple of bad defensive errors.

      Stephenson signed a three-year, $27.4-million contract in the offseason, with the Hornets luring him from Indiana and hoping he would be a key piece to a future championship run. And he has contributed. He leads the team in both rebounds (10.5 per game) and assists (6.0) after two games.

      Stephenson isn’t the only player trying to find his shot, either. Kemba Walker shot 1-for-11 Saturday, missed the potential game-tying jumper at the end and is now 10 for 37 through two games.

      But Clifford obviously isn’t happy with his team freelancing its way through a lot of offensive possessions. Stephenson – while not all of the problem – is a big part of that.

      Clifford took pains to praise guard Gary Neal for being “smart,” “organized” and “great” during his news conference. It was Neal (10 points) who took Stephenson’s place for almost all of the fourth quarter.

      Said Clifford: “What I saw in the fourth quarter was smart, inside-out basketball ... Fundamentally sound ... Before that it was laissez-faire, random basketball, which – against a team like (Memphis) – you got no shot.”

      Stephenson made one of his six shot attempts on the night – a layup in the third quarter. He still hasn’t scored in the first half this season.

      Immediately after making that layup, he went one on one on the next possession and missed a 19-foot stepback jumper.

      “We’re learning each other,” Stephenson said of he and his teammates. “We’re trying to figure out each other and I’m learning the offense at the same time. So I’m just trying to get comfortable and learn the offense so I can get comfortable shots.”

      So far, this has been an uncomfortable two games for Stephenson and the Hornets. There are 80 more to go, so it’s also important not to overreact. This is a very small sample size.

      But Stephenson, who has the nickname Born Ready, certainly doesn’t seem to be ready at all in his coach’s eyes. And that is going to need to get fixed if these Hornets ever are going to make much of a buzz.

      Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...#storylink=cpy

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        I thought it was interesting in Lance's comments after the game, he added "I have no regrets" after being questioned on other topics.

        To me, that means it's on his mind. Just thought it was interesting.
        Removed link to my website after a PM from Able.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          Interesting developments.

          This tells me the Lance drama was glossed over by Vogel. It confirms that such behavior is why his price was lower than expected. (And that Bird and Vogel played it down.)

          I also think Lance will respond to this new coach who is not going to put up with it. It may be good for everyone involved.
          Idk that we can automatically assume Lance had issues here internally just because he seems to already be having issues with his current coach.

          If there's one thing we know about Lance it's that when frustrated, hes EXTREMELY frustrated. I think he feels a bit of pressure right now and is forcing it a bit, and is frustrated with the lack of results.

          Watching the first two games, he needs to be more willing to dump the ball downlow. Jefferson should touch the ball damn near every trip down. His best time on the floor in game 1 was when he was swinging the ball to open players, and not holding the ball. He held the ball way too much tonight. As Joe and CDash said, Lance just needs to accept his role and understand that his versatility is the best way for him to contribute

          They'll get it figured out and I'm sure we will all hear about it.
          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-01-2014, 11:43 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            I recall reading something about it being more like family...but not about him going there to be the #1.
            Yea because Lance would come out and say I went to Charlotte to be the #1...

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              It might have been the truth as far as he's concerned. Also, Lance wasn't the only issue. Paul had his brain turned off for months apparently knocking up a stripper and jacking on the net....and Roy Hibbert was spouting to the media stuff that should have been left in-house. If that is more like family...smh.
              Lance Stephenson plays basketball. Paul George kncoking up a stripper is irrelevant to his career.


              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                I didn't realize literally did not play a second in the 4th. I just saw Clifford's press conference....he was, uh, pissed. Talked about how you have to be in your sport against a team like Memphis, can't worry about your missed shots and you have to play in the system and know your role.


                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  I missed those two quotes.
                  You didn't see the quote about Hronets being more like family? It was plastered all over at the start of training camp. And Lance has not specifically said anything about expecting to be the number 1 option, but that should be a pretty obvious assumption. Lance wears his intentions on his sleeve. It is his greatest strength and weakness. Also, I only put the quote around the family part, but the being the number 1 part is clearly on his mind. Otherwise there is no reason to leave Indiana.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-02-2014, 12:42 AM.


                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Interesting developments.

                    This tells me the Lance drama was glossed over by Vogel. It confirms that such behavior is why his price was lower than expected. (And that Bird and Vogel played it down.)

                    I also think Lance will respond to this new coach who is not going to put up with it. It may be good for everyone involved.
                    Maybe he will respond positively to it, but it is literally an all new experience for him. It is going to be his responsibility to get it sorted.
                    Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-02-2014, 12:41 AM.


                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      It honestly will be intersting to see a coach that's not all sunshine and rainbows, for better or worse, have to deal with Lance. It's something I hadn't really thought about ut this stuff has reminded me of how much of a players coach Frank is. In the sense that he's never, ever, going to say a negative thing about one of his guys.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Dude, you took over about 20 straight threads this summer with your Lance diatribes. Don't throw stones in a glass house.
                        You know, if it's only one guy... put him on ignore?

                        As for the Lance thing, I wouldn't mind at all if he's a disaster in CHA, they don't pick up his third year, and he comes to the realization that the Pacers are the best team for him after all, signing here for cheap since every other team would be wary. He would only be 26 at that point. Best case scenario for us.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          It honestly will be intersting to see a coach that's not all sunshine and rainbows, for better or worse, have to deal with Lance. It's something I hadn't really thought about ut this stuff has reminded me of how much of a players coach Frank is. In the sense that he's never, ever, going to say a negative thing about one of his guys.
                          In the media sure, but do you really think he's sunshine and rainbows all the time in private with the players? I doubt it myself.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            You know, if it's only one guy... put him on ignore?

                            As for the Lance thing, I wouldn't mind at all if he's a disaster in CHA, they don't pick up his third year, and he comes to the realization that the Pacers are the best team for him after all, signing here for cheap since every other team would be wary. He would only be 26 at that point. Best case scenario for us.
                            what's weird about the coulda/shoulda/woulda stuff with Lance, Lance was gone before PG went down. had he stayed this'd be Lance's team offensively, for better or worse.

                            then next year PG's back and we gotta reel Lance back in after a full season of him going all kamikaze. that'd be a tough damn thing to do, assuming West didn't rip his damn head off around the All Star break. I don't know, I'm kind of coming to terms with being pissed about losing Lance's talent but also thinking he's got to take another mental step to learn to harness that talent. once we draft a nice prospect in the 8-12 range this coming draft I don't think anyone'll really care much about Lance. as long as we don't draft the next Hansbrough.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                              what's weird about the coulda/shoulda/woulda stuff with Lance, Lance was gone before PG went down. had he stayed this'd be Lance's team offensively, for better or worse.

                              then next year PG's back and we gotta reel Lance back in after a full season of him going all kamikaze. that'd be a tough damn thing to do, assuming West didn't rip his damn head off around the All Star break. I don't know, I'm kind of coming to terms with being pissed about losing Lance's talent but also thinking he's got to take another mental step to learn to harness that talent. once we draft a nice prospect in the 8-12 range this coming draft I don't think anyone'll really care much about Lance. as long as we don't draft the next Hansbrough.
                              Impossible to say now, of course. On the flipside, maybe being entrusted with the team would develop a sense of maturity and leadership in him? I don't know.

                              I would be more receptive to your theory though if it turns out that the tough treatment he's getting in CHA is what he needed to develop into a better player.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                You didn't see the quote about Hronets being more like family? It was plastered all over at the start of training camp. And Lance has not specifically said anything about expecting to be the number 1 option, but that should be a pretty obvious assumption. Lance wears his intentions on his sleeve. It is his greatest strength and weakness. Also, I only put the quote around the family part, but the being the number 1 part is clearly on his mind. Otherwise there is no reason to leave Indiana.
                                Should it?

                                http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...l#.VCobCtq9KSM
                                Now in Charlotte with a chance to shine brighter than he has in the NBA, does the offense need to go through him?

                                “The offense is Big Al,” Stephenson said without pause, referring to Hornets center Al Jefferson. “Big Al is holding it down in the paint. I would definitely go to him first. I want to be a playmaker, a scorer, a rebounder, a defender. I want to do whatever to help the team.

                                “Big Al and Kemba, they’re unstoppable. I don’t want to say I want the game to go through me because we have other guys on the floor that can contribute, too. I want to be part of that. I want to be that guy to help the team win and do the dirty work to help us win.”

                                Mentioning Jefferson first says something about Stephenson’s development, Kemba Walker says.

                                “The first thing about maturity is understanding,” Walker said. “And in this league, when you have guys that buy into a team and what the coach is trying to do, your chances are very high to win.

                                “Especially because of what everyone says about him, for what everyone thinks about him, for him to say that, it goes to show what kind of person he is. Everyone sees antics and stuff and thinks he’s a bad person, but that’s not the case at all. He wants to win. We all want to win, and we brought him here to win.”
                                I understand it's a good day to get your shots in, especially with the Pacers' season in the drain, but as Pacer fans, some of us really need to get over this bitter ex-boyfriend complex. We sound ridiculous, repeating the same lies and myths over and over again, selectively embracing only the information that fits our narrative. The reasons why Lance left have been outlined ad nauseam throughout these 30 or so pages, and contrary to popular belief, he did prefer to stay, Candace's article headlined that very quote straight from the horse's mouth. For a guy who wears his intentions on his sleeve, I'd say that's as straightforward as it gets. Whether people choose to make more assumptions and read further into his psyche than necessary to find some justification for his departure... that's another question, one that says more about them than Lance Stephenson.

                                Good game or bad game, Lance's game doesn't affect the Pacers' win/loss column. It's that simple. Everything else is hypotheticals and regurgitated emotions. If he selfdestructs, let him selfdestruct. If he turns into an All-Star, good for him. But these repetitive arguments serve no purpose other than to incite more division between Pacer fans. And frankly, we have bigger problems than Lance Stephenson right now.
                                2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X