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

Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

    I learn about as much about the game reading the post game thread as I do about history watching the History Channel.

    We're 6-3. We've got 57 more games this season. Let's hope our injured players recover and we can get a win on Wednesday.

    N.B. The Lance vs. Price ******** has devolved into childish potshots and ignorance piled upon ignorance. I'm sorry I ever participated in it and I hope it ends soon because it is making the board a much shittier place to discuss Pacers basketball.
    You Got The Tony!!!!!!

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

      Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
      I learn about as much about the game reading the post game thread as I do about history watching the History Channel.
      As a history major who hates the so-called History Channel, let me just say this analogy is full of win.
      "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

      "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

      "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        I agree.....this games shows us a few things:

        1 ) Despite how Granger has shot as of late....take him out of the equation and plug PG into his role...and we see that PG isn't ready for primetime...YET. It doesn't mean that PG can't fill that role in the future...it means that PG is currently "Robin in Training" and isn't ready to put on the Bat-Underwear yet.

        2 ) Having DG and ( most notably ) GH in the lineup completely changes the dynamics of what our lineups are used and who plays with who. GH is a far better counter to LouWill, Jrue Holiday and Evan Turner than having to use AJ and Lance in the lineup. Also, his scoring would have probably helped when the Team couldn't buy a bucket in the 4th QTR.

        3 ) I know that we've been having this whole AJ vs. Lance debate....I've been told that there is potential there.....but when it comes to Lance....I don't see any of it translating into anything when he's on the floor.....in fact, I barely notice that he's on the floor when he's playing. I know that AJ is not the greatest option that we have as a backup point....but when he's on the floor...I can tell that that he's somewhat contributing to a certain extent. Maybe Lance has to play more with AJ or DC ( running the point ) while he sticks to the SG spot.....but I just don't get it. Of course, it's possible that Lance's role simply hasn't been laid out ( is he a PG? or is a SG in the lineup ) and therefore it's harder for him to figure out what he has to do. I admit that I don't notice the little things that Players do....so, help me...help me understand what the fascination with Lance is. I'm not saying that he can't reach whatever potential that Bird thinks he may have....I'm just saying that I don't see it yet.

        I don't like that we lost...but given that our primary scoring option and one of our key Guards are out...I'm not too dismayed at our loss.
        I think tonight was the first time lance played wing all season. He didn't play point tonight.

        Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

          that was what PG's first game kind of being the first option. And u guys are ready to throw him off the boat. Watch when he has a good game everyone is gonna say, "i love PG, he is our franchise".

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            We didn't play as well as we could have or should have. So it's not surprising or a huge disappointment that we lost.

            However, I am disappointed that neither Paul George nor Lance stepped up when the huge opportunity presented itself. We know they are both talented, but are either gamers? Do either get better when pressure comes their way? Not a lot of evidence so far to prove it.
            look at what i posted:

            Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
            Look at the box score. Paul George shot AWFUL, but he had 5 assists, 2 steals, and 7 rebounds. That is crazy considering I thought he was pretty terrible.

            David West is the same. 15 pts, 11 rebs, 3 assists

            if only this team could get their easy shots to drop...
            If PG hits 4 more shots, he has 20+ points, 5 asts, 7 rebs, and 2 steals

            That is a monster game from a 21 year old! Sure, he had a lot of turnovers, but most of the shots he missed were easy midrange shots and that one put back dunk. I don't understand why everyone is so down on him. The turnovers were bad, but did anyone really expect PG to handle the ball, a raw 21 year old SG, and not turn it over a ton?

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

              Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
              look at what i posted:



              If PG hits 4 more shots, he has 20+ points, 5 asts, 7 rebs, and 2 steals

              That is a monster game from a 21 year old! Sure, he had a lot of turnovers, but most of the shots he missed were easy midrange shots and that one put back dunk. I don't understand why everyone is so down on him. The turnovers were bad, but did anyone really expect PG to handle the ball, a raw 21 year old SG, and not turn it over a ton?
              While PG is getting opportunities and is already recognized as one of our best players, both he and Lance are 3 years younger than the next youngest player on this roster. They say we are a young team, well those two are really young and have more room to develop. I hope to see George really break out this season and if his shot keeps falling he will. However, I also feel another offseason of weight lifting is really going to help him utilize his height, especially in the paint. It will also be interesting to see if he is done growing. Considering most scouts said Paul would take a couple seasons to develop, I think he is doing pretty darn good.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                While PG is getting opportunities and is already recognized as one of our best players, both he and Lance are 3 years younger than the next youngest player on this roster. They say we are a young team, well those two are really young and have more room to develop. I hope to see George really break out this season and if his shot keeps falling he will. However, I also feel another offseason of weight lifting is really going to help him utilize his height, especially in the paint. It will also be interesting to see if he is done growing. Considering most scouts said Paul would take a couple seasons to develop, I think he is doing pretty darn good.
                Amen on all points....


                It seems to me personally, that there are a decent amount here who's memory may be a little hazy..


                Paul George , is every bit AS GOOD as Reggie Miller was at the same juncture of their careers..


                Reggie was just as raw , and by the end of his second year, he was avg 16ppg . Then his transition into his 3rd year he grew into an all star talent.
                I really believe that Paul George CAN be a franchise level player, heck we are seeing it develop in front of our eyes.

                Pretty nice to imagine Hibbert and George BOTH realizing their potential..

                And in INDIANA of all places .... Lady Luck has been good to us .

                And to think, I haven't even mentioned Hansbrough, who has a very good shot at making an all star game if he keeps up his level of play and improves upon it..
                I even think he would make the all-defensive team... probably BEFORE he makes an all star appearance as a reserve..

                I mean seriously... What coach wouldn't want an opportunity to coach Tyler for a game? lol (besides Mario Van Jermey .. heh)


                NOBODY wants to play against Hansbrough..... NOBODY !! .... argh! ....




                .
                Last edited by Kemo; 01-10-2012, 05:10 AM.
                "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                  We need Ariza, like I suggested on the trade proposals
                  Originally posted by Piston Prince
                  Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                  "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                    I did not expect us to win this one, so I'm not so disappointed. We just didn't get strong enough guard play.

                    I was only half watching this game, but things I noticed. We did not post up Jones or George enough. Jones is very good at playing from the post. Jones had a good game overall though. I would have like to of posted up George as well, use his length down low. Just way too many fading jumpers. See if Iggy could have guarded that with out fouling. Iggy had 0 fouls in 40mins!!!! Thats why you lose the game. You have to get to the foul line and hit your shots when you are short handed like this.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                      I think just have either Hill and DG would have resulted in our victory.
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        I think the guy that missed Danny and Hill the most tonight was DC. Danny and Hill help keep people honest, which let's DC operate with one less person to help off when he beats his man. Dahntay, regardless of his talent level in other areas of the game, is exactly the type of offensive player that you are taught to sag off of and go help on someone else.
                        I have a couple of points. The first one correlates to your post above Joe. I watched AJ this game constantly put himself in a good position to make a pass and then have the guys who are supposed to either roll or get in position for support and they vanished on him. Several times he was left hanging with the ball because somebody missed their assignment in the play. I am not apologizing for AJ, because he did make a few questionable decisions last night, but overall I thought he played well. As this pertains to your point, I think a lot of the problems DC was facing were similar in that guys who aren't used to getting that many minutes were often fumbling chances that DC did create. I thought DC played poorly for his standards tonight. I think a major reason behind that is Jrue. Jrue was the more talented player at UCLA and I think it chapped Collison's *** when Jrue was being effective tonight. I think Collison was way too focused on his old college buddy than he was on our team concept. AJ Price played much better than he got credit for. The back to back jumpers that he clanked was a good example of how I think Stephenson leaked out and took away a lot of Price's spacing, which forced him into two options for passes, neither of which had any off the ball movement to facilitate a pass. I just think a lot of our guys left our PG's out to dry tonight. Dahntay and Stephenson were both very guilty of this and none of our PF's really helped with that all night.

                        The one really bright spot I thought was that David West was taking that 15-18 foot jumper without stopping to think about it. That is his bread and butter shot. He has been picking and rolling and when he gets the ball there, he has been deferring a wide open jumper to make an unnecessary pass. Tonight he got the ball and turned in rhythm to knock that shot down on several occassions. When he is hitting that jumper, it opens up our offense considerably. It gives us those outer lanes for the wings to fill on cuts (a la JOB's offense), but in a manner that it is the proper movement for the offensive flow. He spaces the floor for the big fella to work as well. It forces his defender away from a rebounding position. It also gives our wings an opportunity to post up. I really think that shot is a key to our offense. We are effective when he was passing out of it, but at the same time, it can give our offense an added dimension.

                        Another thing I noticed, was that PG was posting up and instead of fading back hard on the shot he was turning and jumping higher to give himself a shorter, much easier shot. I mentioned this a couple days ago, and interestingly he has started to make that change. The one thing I will say about his turnaround attempts last night is that once he got the ball down there, he had already made his decision to shoot. At that point the defender could get into him a little more and PG was not able to get his hips around to square on the turnaround because of it. He needs to work a spin move to the rim against his turnaround so then the defender stays on his heels. If PG can get his hips around and shoulders square on those turnarounds, watch out.

                        I loved Foster, as always.

                        I would have really liked to see us go big against them. Run one point guard with PG, and then put Hans, West, and Hibbert out there. Or even Amundson. I know it might be putting a bit too much pressure on our PF's defensively, but we would have done better preventing extra possessions for them. They shot a ridiculous clip from the field tonight, so there wasn't much that would have changed that, but it would have given us a more post-centric offense to slow the game down a bit. We had an advantage in the post and we should have been more aggressive dictating to them our size advantage. It just as easily could have backfired, since they shot so well.

                        Defensively, we did pretty well I thought. I just think we got winded and they hit way more contested jumpers than we did and that was the difference in the game. They got out to a lead, and we punched back. They extended it and we again punched back. This was the tale of the game. We just didn't have the horses to get all of the way back in it. I loved the fight and persistence playing from behind all night. I would have loved to have seen a well-timed Granger three to get us within a possession on a few of those possession.

                        I think the biggest thing from this game is the quality minutes that our bench got. I think those minutes for AJ, Lance, Dahntay, and PG will be important as we progress this season. They need to be getting minutes from somewhere in order to get a comfort level while on the court. We will need them to get minutes, but these early season games where they do get mintues will be uglier than at the end of the season (hopefully). I thought it was a great game, considering, and that we played hard. Good game, unfortunately we lost.
                        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                          Originally posted by gummy View Post
                          As a history major who hates the so-called History Channel, let me just say this analogy is full of win.
                          Hey, now. Don't you know that nothing ever happened before or after WWII and that Hitler is the most important man who ever lived?
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                            Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
                            If PG hits 4 more shots, he has 20+ points
                            But he didn't.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                              Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                              I hate to be to critical, but most really great players have the IQ part from day one.
                              No they don't. Which is why it took MJ 7 seasons before he got his first ring. Which is why LeBron is still looking for his.

                              It's not just "basketball IQ." It's "NBA basketball IQ." There are things you can do at the HS level that you can't do in college. There are things you can do in college that you can't do in the NBA. It's a learning curve.

                              PG hasn't been in that role before last night. Of course he's going to struggle.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Jon Theodore View Post

                                I've been high on lance, but the high is fading. He blew a golden opportunity tonight to showcase himself and what he can do. Guy has the size, the skillset...just can't seem to put it together.

                                I've never been high on Stephenson, thought Bird made a mistake drafting him, but I decided this year to cut the kid some slack in hopes he would start to develop. I'm disappointed he not producing for someone who has all this talent Bird claims he has. If things don't change, he's trade filler as far as I'm concerned.

                                It's like hearing how great Joe's hunting dog is all year long. Then when hunting season starts the dog can't find any game, runs deer instead of coon/fox, or it runs to hide when it hears a gun shot. It doesn't produce as advertised, and is just a big disappointing waste of time.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X