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

Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

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

  • #46
    Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

    If JO left the Pacers would you guys still be Pacer fans?

    Would you follow him as close on another team?

    Besides Reggie, Ron Artest was probably my 2 all time fave Pacer tied with D2. When he left I admit I followed the Kings a bit more closely, however my feelings about him were greatly tainted so I cant tell the degree I would have normally followed.
    then: adverb - at that time; at the time in question

    than: conjunction & preposition - introducing the second element in a comparison

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      At the risk of bumping a thread with such a stupid premise...
      I'm not sure how a sane person could question Jermaine's work ethic. If our other players improved as consistently and quickly as Jermaine, we'd be championship contenders this year. When JO got here, he couldn't shoot a free throw to save his life, couldn't shoot the ball past 5 feet out, couldn't pass the ball into the ocean from a boat, and was frighteningly skinny. He's improved steadily and dramatically.

      If you don't think JO has a work ethic, you're either blind or flat-out biased against him.
      Um....

      would it be possible to be any more condescending?

      Just because you don't agree with a thread or a person does not make it or them stupid. Just because someone doesn't agree about a players work ethic does not mean they are either blind or biased. There are other options.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

        Originally posted by indypacerfan54 View Post
        If JO left the Pacers would you guys still be Pacer fans?

        Would you follow him as close on another team?

        Besides Reggie, Ron Artest was probably my 2 all time fave Pacer tied with D2. When he left I admit I followed the Kings a bit more closely, however my feelings about him were greatly tainted so I cant tell the degree I would have normally followed.
        I'm still going to be a Pacers fan if JO leaves. The team he goes to will become my 2nd favorite team though.

        If I was here just for JO, all those times JO was hurt or suspended, I wouldnt have stuck around and watched all those Pacers games. I could have went and cheered for another team when JO was hurt if it was like that. If it was only about JO, all those times Pacers got eliminated in the playoffs wouldnt matter to me.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
          Isn't re-writing history fun?
          He seems to be pretty good at it...


          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

            I believe Peja was 4th in MVP votes.

            -Bball
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

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

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

              JO's play has been the on of the few bright spots of the season. While I'll remember this season as somewhat as disappointment to this point, that doesn't mean I have to miss out on one of the best individual seasons a Pacer has had.
              "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

              "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                Um....

                would it be possible to be any more condescending?
                Ooh! Ooh! Pick me! I know the answer!

                I'll take "The original post in this thread" for 800, Alex.



                And I stand by the work ethic comment. Jermaine's got the best work ethic on the team. If Dale Davis or Austin Croshere had worked on their game year-after-year the way JO has, they'd be superstars.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  Ooh! Ooh! Pick me! I know the answer!

                  I'll take "The original post in this thread" for 800, Alex.



                  And I stand by the work ethic comment. Jermaine's got the best work ethic on the team. If Dale Davis or Austin Croshere had worked on their game year-after-year the way JO has, they'd be superstars.
                  Your opinion is noted & you'll also notice not put down or called any dereogatory names.

                  However, I stand by my comment that just because you disagree with someone or thier ideas does not make them or the idea stupid.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                    Originally posted by Anthem
                    Ooh! Ooh! Pick me! I know the answer!

                    I'll take "The original post in this thread" for 800, Alex.



                    And I stand by the work ethic comment. Jermaine's got the best work ethic on the team. If Dale Davis or Austin Croshere had worked on their game year-after-year the way JO has, they'd be superstars.

                    Sorry Anthem a blast from the past. And Dale did pay out of his own pocket.

                    http://www.swish22.com/Montieth0508.html

                    Shot doctor helps Dale Davis at foul line
                    Pacer's free-throw accuracy improves dramatically, bringing more playing time.

                    By MARK MONTIETH, STAFF WRITER
                    (Article from Indianapolis Star/News, May 8, 1999)


                    The Indiana Pacers' roster includes the NBA's free-throw shooting champions from this season and last - Reggie Miller and Chris Mullin.

                    It has six other players who shot at least 80 percent this season.

                    The most notable performance, however, might have come from the player who barely cracked 60 percent - Dale Davis.

                    Records aren't available for improvement at the foul line.

                    But Davis could be a record contender. His accuracy improved 15.3 percent this season, to .618. For a player who had missed more than half of his attempts the past three seasons, it was a breakthrough. [Note from Tom: The above stats are for the 1998-1999 season. In the current season, 1999-2000, Dale shot 68.5% and was as high as 72%.]

                    Davis doesn't need to be reminded how important foul shooting can be. He hit 3-of-10 attempts in Game 7 of the Eastern Conference finals last season in the Pacers' five-point loss to Chicago.

                    Although players often improve at the foul line over the course of their NBA careers, it usually comes gradually. Davis - whose previous best was .572 as a rookie seven seasons ago - made a career's worth of improvement in a season.

                    He can thank a part-time golf instructor and former computer whiz, Tom Nordland, 59, of Boulder Creek, Calif.

                    Nordland worked with Davis in Las Vegas and Atlanta during the lockout and once during training camp in Indianapolis, for a total of eight or nine sessions. He gave long-distance reminders via fax a couple of times during the season. Davis has no doubt about Nordland's impact.

                    Nordland was a standout guard at Roosevelt High School in Minneapolis, who led his team to an undefeated season and the 1957 state title. He averaged 28 points that season and set a record that still stands by hitting 19-of-20 foul shots in the title game. He went to Stanford on a basketball scholarship, but the non-shooting aspects of his game weren't strong enough to get playing time. He went to work in the computer industry, until a layoff six years ago led to a new career.

                    Nordland believes accuracy starts in the legs, where UpForce, a term he has trademarked, leads to a smooth, simple motion that enables players to release the ball from a higher launching point as they move upward. The process leads to a high-arching shot that increases the chance of success.

                    "The motion is so simple and repeatable you can close your eyes and make them," said Nordland, who has a Web site (www.swish22.com) and video, Swish - A Guide to Great Basketball Shooting.

                    Nordland's first NBA client was Utah's Adam Keefe, whom he met through Stanford coach Mike Montgomery. Keefe had shot just .689 from the foul line two seasons ago, but improved to .810 last season after working with Nordland. He dipped to .697 this season without him. [Note from Tom Nordland: Adam shot 80.5% in the 1999-2000 season.]

                    Nordland was so confident he could help Davis that he set his fee based on Davis' improvement. If Davis improved to 55 percent, he would pay Nordland $3,000. If he reached 60 percent he would owe $5,000. If he shot between 65 and 69.9 percent, the fee was $8,000. Anything 70 percent or above would cost $12,000.

                    "I underpriced myself," Nordland said of the $5,000 he earned.

                    The Pacers might agree. Davis' improvement at the line enabled coach Larry Bird to leave him in at the end of close games without fear that opponents would foul him to put him on the line. That gave Davis more opportunities to do what he does best - rebound and play defense. It also lifted his confidence, which raised all areas of his play.

                    "Late in the game, I don't mind the ball being in my hands," Davis said. "In the past, I was a little hesitant to make a play because I wasn't sure I could step up and hit the foul shot. Now I'm making the play any chance I get."

                    Added Miller, who led the NBA at .915 this season: "He was almost a liability out there in late-game situations, so teams now are probably scratching their heads because he's going to the line and hitting big-time free throws. That's only going to help us in the long run because we need him out there in late-game situations."

                    Davis had relapses during the season, but finished strong by hitting 11 of his final 12 foul shots over the final five games. He fell short of his season's goal of 70 percent, but expects to reach that, and beyond, next season.

                    "I can't tell you how proud I am of him," Nordland said. "But he's only half as far as I can lead him. We have another 20 percentage points to go."

                    [Photo of Dale accompanied article, with this title:]
                    NEW MAN: Dale Davis' improvement at the free-throw line with the UpForce technique has increased his confidence. "Late in the game, I don't mind the ball being in my hands," he said.

                    Published: Saturday, May 8, 1999 in THE INDIANAPOLIS STAR/THE INDIANAPOLIS NEWS
                    Page: C04
                    (c) Copyright 1999 Indianapolis Newspapers, Inc.
                    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                      Reggie didn't threaten to sign with the Knicks as a free agent in '96? I must've missed that.

                      Its a business, and a game.

                      And JO is playing like a true professional.
                      I've heard this several times, and would like for you or any old timer to go a little more in-depth on the Reggie flirting with the Knicks issue.

                      I've heard people say before that Reggie was flirting with NY, but that the Knicks instead went with the younger Allan Houston.

                      I've always thought that he would have been insulted if the Pacers would have paid him market value in 2003 (which was far below what they paid him). I wouldn't have been suprised if he would have gone to LA or NJ if the Pacers had offered him the same amount that those teams were.

                      I agree with you on your premise that there is basically a myth about Reggie that has been blown out of proportion. Often what people remember in their memories is better than what reality really was.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Was Reggie really the definition of loyal? I know he took that seriously, but at the same time didn't he flirt with New York in the mid 90's? Would he have come back to Indiana after '03 if we hadn't paid him as much as we did?
                        Loyal is as loyal does.

                        Reggie was courted by multiple teams every time he was in contract negotiations. Of course he was, he was an All-Star caliber record breaking shooter. If a guy like that is coming close to the open market, it is team management malpractice to not call him up.

                        LA pursued him heavily the summer that he signed his last deal. That was the same summer they got the Glove and Malone. They wanted 5 HOF players, not just 4.

                        And Reggie always chose Indiana. Every time. enough said on Reggies loyalty.
                        “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                        “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                          Originally posted by indypacerfan54 View Post
                          Ron Artest was the best player on that team.
                          If I remember right, didn't Ron have one foul at the end of one of the games on Rip Hamilton that costed us the game and arguably the series? But I'm not sure I was like 11.
                          Originally posted by indypacerfan54 View Post
                          If JO left the Pacers would you guys still be Pacer fans?

                          Would you follow him as close on another team?
                          I will always be a Pacers fan no matter who is one the team. Sure if they shipped off JO I would be sort of upset but I wouldn't change my favortite team. Even if Artest, Jack, and Tinsley were the only people on the Pacers, I would still be a loyal fan.

                          I would follow him a little. I like to check up on former Pacers every once in a while.
                          I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                            Originally posted by indypacerfan54 View Post
                            If JO left the Pacers would you guys still be Pacer fans?

                            Would you follow him as close on another team?

                            Besides Reggie, Ron Artest was probably my 2 all time fave Pacer tied with D2. When he left I admit I followed the Kings a bit more closely, however my feelings about him were greatly tainted so I cant tell the degree I would have normally followed.
                            Perhaps the reason that everyone is disagreeing with you is because you're wrong about JO. Just a hunch!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                              Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                              Loyal is as loyal does.

                              Reggie was courted by multiple teams every time he was in contract negotiations. Of course he was, he was an All-Star caliber record breaking shooter. If a guy like that is coming close to the open market, it is team management malpractice to not call him up.

                              LA pursued him heavily the summer that he signed his last deal. That was the same summer they got the Glove and Malone. They wanted 5 HOF players, not just 4.

                              And Reggie always chose Indiana. Every time. enough said on Reggies loyalty.
                              You really mean to tell me those teams were willing to pay him 7.5 mio a year like we (the Pacers) did??????
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Why do you "fans" react to JO in such a bizzare manner?

                                Adam,

                                Reggie was a free agent and was exercising his rights. Nothing wrong with that.

                                The Pacers even brought in a bunch of other FA shooting guards - Bryan Stith, I believe, was even offered a contract.

                                When Allan Houston signed on Day #1 with the Knicks, it threw Reggie's plans for a loop. He was probably just trying to look for leverage to maximize his Pacers contract, but he didn't sign with the Pacers until right before training camp.

                                I think, at that time, he decided he'd spend the rest of his career here. I don't beleive he had made that decsion prior to then.

                                Regardless, to suggest that Reggie would've stayed here if the money was less is not an assumption I'd want to make.

                                Reggie had a team built around his strenghts and weaknesses. JO has not really had that luxury. But we hold both of them to the same standard, on and off the court.

                                I wonder how Reggie would've reacted, in his prime, if the Pacers had acquired a "1B" option. We know Reggie generally embraced Jalen later in his career, and Reggie was clearly already into decline by 1999/2000 when Jalen took over the scoring lead and became the #1 option. But how would Reggie have reacted in 1993-96? Chuck and Detlef were traded away for guys that were primarily defensive players that didn't require a lot of touches, and Smits never really was a threat to be Option #1. Did Reggie request that or did management just recognize a need for Reggie to be the clear #1 in the pecking order?

                                Instead, JO has been given a bunch of brash-mouthed knuckleheads that overestimate their own worth (Artest, Jackson, Harrington, Anthony Johnson) or mid-level guys that still hog the ball too much (Fred Jones, Tinsley, etc.) I'm not convinced that Reggie would've behaved any better.

                                After all, it wasn't a coincidence that Reggie signed his first contract extension with the Pacers the day after Versace was fired and Bo Hill was promoted to replace him.

                                = = = = = = = = = = = =

                                The point is, many of us feel bad for JO because he's not really been given a fair chance to lead a leadable team anywhere.
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X