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

Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

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

    Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

    http://chicagosports.chicagotribune....s-home-utility

    Sam Smith On Pro Basketball
    Take-money-and-run guy
    Pacers' O'Neal like several rich stars— when going gets tough, he wants out

    January 8, 2007

    Isn't a team owed something when it commits more than $100 million to a player? When things aren't going well, shouldn't that player, as the leader of the team, take it upon himself to improve the team?

    I remember Michael Jordan being asked frequently early in his career about playing for a poor team. Though repeatedly frustrated by losing to Boston and Detroit, he said he wanted to be around when the Bulls got better.

    Players ask for long, generous financial commitments from teams. But don't they owe what they can provide? Not only talent and effort, but dedication? It's one big reason I'm always pushing for a trade for Kevin Garnett. He doesn't want the easy way out. That's why you want players like him.

    And why you don't want someone like Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal.

    The Pacers' big man in size only became the latest to decide things weren't going well, so he might as well be elsewhere. Forget that he's in the fourth year of a $126.6 million contract that has three years left after this season at an average of more than $21 million per season.

    "If I can't take this team to another level, I truthfully believe we should go our separate ways at the end of the season," O'Neal told the Indianapolis Star and ESPN. "If we don't have a system set to win a championship, if we don't have the crew to win a championship, then what are we doing?

    "I'm getting to the point, in my 11th year, where I don't want to play 82 games and then exit to watch somebody else pop champagne. I'm tired of that. I want to compete for a championship. If we can't do it, that's a whole [different] story."

    What's the role of the team's highest-paid player in that? O'Neal makes $10 million more than the Pacers' second-highest-paid player, Al Harrington. Yet he wants out!

    O'Neal is having a good season, averaging 19.3 points and 10.6 rebounds and leading the league in blocks, even though he has become more of a jump shooter. This is after playing barely half of the last two seasons. A suspension resulting from the brawl at the Palace of Auburn Hills helped limit him to 44 games two years ago and injuries held him to 51 last season.

    Now he's finally starting to recover—despite being at a five-year low in scoring—and he wants to run away.

    There's a lot of that in recent NBA history: You sign a big, long-term contract as the centerpiece of a team, then find things aren't working out. Or perhaps you are not as good as you thought you were or aren't worth that much. Take the blame? Nah.

    Leave.

    There's a parade of them, and it's where you find the losers—guys like Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady and, this season, Allen Iverson and O'Neal. They run from the challenges and responsibility. You don't want those types of players at those prices.

    I'm sure the Pacers would love to accommodate O'Neal, who has an opt-out clause after the 2008-09 season. But don't expect him to give up $44 million for two seasons when he is 30. Indiana tried to foist him on Minnesota last year for Garnett. No chance.

    All you have to do is look at O'Neal's record: six playoff berths as the Pacers' leader, four first-round eliminations and career playoff scoring, rebounding, assist and shooting averages lower than in the regular season. In other words, a player who comes up small.

    The Bulls need a low-post scoring option at power forward who is a true championship contender. No, not Jermaine O'Neal.

    Forget Randolph as well

    Not Portland's Zach Randolph either, though he is averaging 24 points and 10.3 rebounds.

    Despite being listed at only 6 feet 9 inches, he might be the best true low-post scorer who can play with his back to the basket. The Knicks' Eddy Curry continues to make his case for that title, with back-to-back 27-point games in Seattle and Portland. But the Bulls had him. They've moved on.

    Despite what the Trail Blazers might say, they'd love to move Randolph. Some believe Bulls coach Scott Skiles could get through to him. They're both from Indiana and went to Michigan State. Skiles has tried to help Randolph over the years through Spartans coach Tom Izzo.

    But it would be a heck of a risk, and probably too big of a contract for the Bulls to take on with Luol Deng, Ben Gordon and Andres Nocioni up for extensions after this season. Randolph has five years left at almost $15 million a year. The rebuilding Trail Blazers might take young players and expiring contracts. And they're near the bottom of the league again, so why not?

    Last week was more of the same for Randolph. He was benched in a fourth quarter, got into an angry exchange with coach Nate McMillan over yet another laggard practice effort and had another off-court incident in which a visiting friend was arrested for drunken driving while in Randolph's car. The friend also allegedly had Randolph's handgun and had been waving it around at a club.


    Heat on the Heat

    Ron Rothstein, who started 0-17 as the Heat's first coach in 1988-89, won't top that as Miami's interim coach this season, but wins will be hard to come by. Though Pat Riley supposedly is returning after knee surgery, it's easy to believe this is it for Riley as Miami's coach with Shaquille O'Neal out injured and James Posey and Antoine Walker thrown under the bus for supposed conditioning issues. Riley admitted on his radio show he wouldn't have left for surgery if the team had been winning, adding, "They simply don't want to work."

    The Heat could return from its current Western Conference trip nine or 10 games under .500, with four of its next seven on the road, including a Jan. 27 trip to Chicago. Given the strength of this draft class, especially the big men, speculation in Miami has been about whether the Heat will try to find a replacement for O'Neal in the lottery, knowing O'Neal still has three years left after this season at $20 million per year.

    After all, the Spurs gave up on a season like this one, with David Robinson hurt in 1996-97. Then they drafted Tim Duncan with the No. 1 pick and prospered for 10 years.

    Miami can't ignore that Dwyane Wade signed only a three-year extension. If the Heat doesn't have talent coming in to follow O'Neal, Wade would have many options elsewhere when he is 27.

    Here comes Arenas

    The best game of the week for the Bulls should be Wednesday night at Washington. The Wizards lost Sunday in Toronto but have scored at least 100 points in 17 straight games. They also have the best show in the NBA in Gilbert Arenas, who is averaging 30.5 points, with games of 60 and 54 this season.

    Arenas acknowledges he was devastated by being left off Team USA last summer. He practiced every day for hours after that and actually wore himself out coming into the season. He still doesn't see how players like the Bulls' Kirk Hinrich made it ahead of him.

    "If I couldn't beat out Chris Paul and Kirk Hinrich and Shane Battier, I guess I wasn't good enough," Arenas sarcastically told the Denver Post.

    Wizards coach Eddie Jordan labels Arenas' eccentricities "Gilbertology."

    Arenas might be the most refreshing and open player in the NBA. He throws his jersey into the stands after every game. He yells "Hibachi" after a shot when he is hot.

    He turned and walked away as the ball went through the hoop for a 32-foot pull-up game-winner last week. He wears jersey No. 0 for how little he had growing up and the respect he got as a second-round pick. He often works out in the gym after midnight. And last week the social event in Washington was the big-budget birthday party he threw for himself.

    Arenas' life story of being abandoned by his mother and raised by his father and sleeping in his dad's car when they got to Los Angeles reads like the Will Smith movie "The Pursuit of Happyness."

    "I am original," Arenas said. "I do my own thing."

    He's also an MVP candidate.

    Carter rumors

    The Nets have been sending out word they have no interest in trading Vince Carter, though I don't believe it. He's their leading scorer and he has an opt-out clause after this season, but he has been in a season-long funk with personal issues.

    Rumors had the Nets talking with the staggering Clippers for the suddenly in-demand Corey Maggette. You wonder if a deal sending Maggette and Sam Cassell to New Jersey would re-energize the Nets and provide the Clippers with a deep threat, given their commitment to poor-shooting point guard Shaun Livingston.

    It didn't help last week when Livingston, after being burned by Arenas, publicly wondered why he didn't have double-teaming help.

    "We can't just keep leaving one guy on an island," he said. "Obviously, it's not working."

    Hey, maybe you should try harder.

    Nuggets miss Anthony

    Denver is 2-6 with Iverson in the lineup, and Carmelo Anthony's suspension is looking even more damaging. The Nuggets close the season with 13 of 18 on the road and have been wasting one of the softer parts of their schedule. ... While Ohio State freshman Greg Oden slogged through a win over Illinois on Saturday with seven points on 3-of-12 shooting, Texas freshman Kevin Durant was scoring a Big 12 freshman record of 37 points, with 16 rebounds and five three-pointers in a rout of Colorado. Could he be the Jordan to Oden's Hakeem Olajuwon in the 1984 draft? ... Don Nelson is saying he'd like assistant Keith Smart to succeed him as Warriors coach. The Heat's Riley has said he'd select assistant Erik Spoelstra eventually. … We might have to start taking the Mavericks seriously. They're on their second double-digit winning streak of the season, and in Friday's victory the Spurs were the 12th straight opponent they've held under 100 points. … With 10-day contracts now in effect, there should be plenty of comings and goings. Orlando sent former Illini James Augustine to the National Basketball Development League, and the Jazz waived Illinois' Roger Powell. … Nelson on Golden State signing Kentucky guard Kelenna Azubuike: "[Executive Vice President Chris Mullin] called me on New Year's Eve and asked me if I liked sambuca, and I said 'yeah.' And he went out there and signed this guy, Azubuike. I thought it was a drink, and he was talking about a player."

    sasmith@tribune.com
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

    I kind of agree with him.

    JO hasn't even played a full season in the past 2 years and hes complaining about not being able to win a championship. You feel bad for him, but this team is 1-2 moves away from being East contenders.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

      This article has already been mentioned in the "Star} O'Neal's Frustration Boils Over" thread (post #61.)

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

        Yeah when I read "where I don't want to play 82 games and then exit to watch somebody else pop champagne." 82 games, all I could say was WTF.

        How dare he complain about not winning a championship, maybe he should have thought about that before going 20 of 55 in 04, BEFORE he got hurt in the playoff series against the Pistons.

        Lets not forget about his 36.5% shooting in 05, but he made sure to jack up enough shots to get 16 PPG. Not like that was a liability.

        And yeah he played really good in parts of the Playoffs last year, but you have got to show up to the whole game especially the 4th quarter, and Anthony Johnson is the guy that led us through the 4th quarters of our victories and almost by himself won game 6. I forget which one are we paying 20 miilion, and which one did we trade to save money.

        JO seems to think he is absolved of blame in these losses. I wonder if he ever considered not hanging with his buddy sheed the night before a game and studying film. or maybe icing an ankle.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

          Sam Smith on a Monday?

          What a surprise - a trashy article.
          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

          • #6
            Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

            Didn't he write an article wanting the Bulls to trade for JO just a couple of months ago?
            PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

              He rotates through "trade our trash for JO", "trade our trash for Kobe", and "trade our trash for KG."

              Its always the same theme - eventually these guys will get frustrated and ask out - then you can get them cheap. And then, when they get frustrated and ask out, everyone realized there is no way the Pacers are trade JO (nor the Lakers/ Kobe nor Minnesota/KG) for Gorden, expiring contracts, and lottery-protected picks.

              Seems like he's just trying to prove he can drive down their trade value.

              My hunch is that the people that actually make trades in the NBA are much smarter than to believe what Sam Smith thinks of a player's market value.
              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

              • #8
                Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                Jay, you and I think very alike sometimes.

                I read the title and thought "trying to drive down trade value."
                This space for rent.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                  Sam Smith seems to make a distinction between wanting a player like KG but not wanting a player like JONeal.

                  There are similiarities ( in terms of how far both players have taken their respective teams, signing extensions with their teams but still only taking their teams so far, supporting cast, etc ) in where they stand with the future of their organization.....I know that the situations aren't 100% the same...with the main difference being JONeal's past injuries....but they are close.

                  NOTE - I'm not saying that JONeal = KG ( skillwise and all )...it just seems ( and I could be wrong ) that...on the surface....their situations ( in terms of their history with their teams ) seem to mirror each other.

                  I know that there are differences in the respective history of the TWolves and the Pacers over the last 2 seasons.....the TWolves situation with Joe Smith that cost them draft picks and McHale's rather poor record of drafting players....compared to the Pacers last 3 seasons of "drama".....both situations that KG and JONeal do not have control over....but there is enough of a difference in KG and JONeal's situation that makes Sam Smith say "The Bulls should go after KG...but not JONeal" when both essentially will be at a crossroads with their teams at the end of this season ( if not sooner ).
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                    There was a thread less then a month ago where SMith wanted to throw all players and the kitchen sink at Indy to GET JO


                    Smith on Monday ........................
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                      Originally posted by able View Post
                      There was a thread less then a month ago where SMith wanted to throw all players and the kitchen sink at Indy to GET JO


                      Smith on Monday ........................
                      So you're saying it's wrong to change your mind BASED ON SOMETHING JO DID? Most here liked RA until the brawl. Or until he tried to quit the team to promote his cd. Those incidents didn't affect your opinion of Artest?
                      What's different here?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                        Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                        Didn't he write an article wanting the Bulls to trade for JO just a couple of months ago?
                        Yes, but that was before O'Neal was upset with mediocrity.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                          A team leader being upset with mediocrity, Why can't I see anything wrong with that ?
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                            Originally posted by able View Post
                            A team leader being upset with mediocrity, Why can't I see anything wrong with that ?
                            I think being upset with mediocrity is one of the foundations of being a team leader.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Sam Smith Column in the Chicago Tribune -Very critical Of JO

                              Originally posted by PacerMan View Post
                              So you're saying it's wrong to change your mind BASED ON SOMETHING JO DID? Most here liked RA until the brawl. Or until he tried to quit the team to promote his cd. Those incidents didn't affect your opinion of Artest?
                              What's different here?

                              JO has said several times over the last few years that he should be traded if he can't lead the Pacers to the title.

                              The writer did a few creative edits with the quote. JO's intent with those comments was to say that if Jermaine O'Neal can't lead the Pacers to a title, that the Pacers deserved better and should get a better leader (presumably trading JO in the process). Notice he never says "trade me to a contender".

                              I can't find a copy, but I seem to remember JO saying "If I can't lead the Pacers to a title, the Pacers need to get someone who can". I think he was repeating his sentiment a little here.

                              I don't know why I am spending time discussing this stupid article. Clearly this dude would trade for JO in a heartbeat if he ran the Bulls.


                              "Despite being listed at only 6 feet 9 inches, he might be the best true low-post scorer who can play with his back to the basket. The Knicks' Eddy Curry continues to make his case for that title, with back-to-back 27-point games in Seattle and Portland. But the Bulls had him. They've moved on."

                              I mean, come on. Dude is trying to say that the two best low post scores might be Zach Randolph and Eddy Curry. That's all you need to read to gauge the credibility of this guy.
                              The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                              http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                              RSS Feed
                              Subscribe via iTunes

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X