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

Star: O'Brien's job is secure

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

  • #46
    Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    And yet they're the two that need to go the most. I guess there is a silver lining.
    I see a major flaw in that comment. Do you?

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

      When you say "mob" that paints the picture as an irrational bunch just out looking for blood. That is as far from the case as possible.

      JOb is the root of the problem. Look at his offensive designs. What are they? They highlight the skills of players like Troy Murphy, and put players like Roy Hibbert on the bench. The message is too shoot the ball when open. Players like D.Jones aren't good shooters. TJ isn't a good shooter.

      A good coach plays towards the strength of his players. He doesn't change 25-30 year old men into what he wants. They are what they are. They cannot be changed. The definition of insane is trying the same things and expecting a different result (paraphrasing of course). That is exactly what JOb is doing. He keeps getting a bigger hammer to try and fit his square peg into a round hole.

      All summer he talked about getting better defensive players. So he got D.Jones, Solo, and Watson. Then he decides it's better to start Rush, when it was obvious to all that DJones was the heart of the team, and a pretty damn good defender in himself.

      It took him how long to realize TJ shouldn't be the first option at PG. But at the same time, he was leaving TJ in to finish games. (That makes sense)

      Solo might as well sit beside Deiner. All while Murphy continues to play big minutes. As long as the offense doesn't suffer, they need better defenders. That is the message. As long as you can shoot the 3, and spread the floor, you get playing time. I about puked when I watched McRoberts set up for a PnR and instead of rolling, he stepped out and shot a damn 3. I immediately turned off the game.

      This team as constructed won't win any rings. Obviously. Then what is the goal for the organization? When you start a season NBA Live, it asks you what you want as a direction for your club. Rebuild, Develop, or Contend.

      JOb is trying to contend while everyone else is in rebuild/develop mode. Like I've said many times. I can take losses when young players get big minutes. In the end they will either develop, or they won't. Either way you learn a lot about them, and find out what needs to happen in the future.

      Troy Murphy is who he is, and playing him big minutes pushes back the development of younger players, doesn't allow you to evaluate them, nor decide if they should be a part of the future and if so what role they are capable of performing.


      Other than saving money, what positives come out of keeping him around? None.

      EDIT: And now he say's they need faster players. No what they need is a different coach.
      Last edited by Since86; 12-28-2009, 04:27 PM.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

        Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
        Nobody likes rooting for a bad team and neither do I. Forget two years ago. We became terrible when the "pitch forks" came out the year after the brawl, and our front office decided fans would rather lose than root for a bunch of so called thugs. The front office made a "knee jerk" reaction to our mumblings and now look. Everything we complain about is a direct result of those reactions. I don't think Larry plans to make the same mistake that Donnie and he himself did by listening to everything fans say.

        Please, don't confuse me for a JOb lover, but firing him accomplishes nothing at this point. The problem is personel and the fact that we took on two over-inflated long-term contracts for players who are basically mediocre in comparison to their pay. Also, we exiled a player with the other semi-big deal killing any chance of us moving him. Larry made that mistake. Then, we absorbed another long-term contract for an over-paid mediocre player in Ford. For two seasons we have not been able to sign any real help because of the cap situation, go figure. Futhermore, we have flopped on our draft choices outside of Tyler. So, this poor performance was to be expected from my perspective, and JOb has been the easy target ever since.
        Well at least it will provide change and a "hope" in the fans eyes that this play is unacceptable and they are serious about putting a better product on the floor.

        But you are correct as far as it probably wont impact the record much
        Sittin on top of the world!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

          [QUOTE=Since86;934978]When you say "mob" that paints the picture as an irrational bunch just out looking for blood. That is as far from the case as possible.

          JOb is the root of the problem. Look at his offensive designs. What are they? They highlight the skills of players like Troy Murphy, and put players like Roy Hibbert on the bench. The message is too shoot the ball when open. Players like D.Jones aren't good shooters. TJ isn't a good shooter.

          A good coach plays towards the strength of his players. He doesn't change 25-30 year old men into what he wants. They are what they are. They cannot be changed. The definition of insane is trying the same things and expecting a different result (paraphrasing of course). That is exactly what JOb is doing. He keeps getting a bigger hammer to try and fit his square peg into a round hole.


          All summer he talked about getting better defensive players. So he got D.Jones, Solo, and Watson. Then he decides it's better to start Rush, when it was obvious to all that DJones was the heart of the team, and a pretty damn good defender in himself.

          It took him how long to realize TJ shouldn't be the first option at PG. But at the same time, he was leaving TJ in to finish games. (That makes sense)

          Solo might as well sit beside Deiner. All while Murphy continues to play big minutes. As long as the offense doesn't suffer, they need better defenders. That is the message. As long as you can shoot the 3, and spread the floor, you get playing time. I about puked when I watched McRoberts set up for a PnR and instead of rolling, he stepped out and shot a damn 3. I immediately turned off the game.

          This team as constructed won't win any rings. Obviously. Then what is the goal for the organization? When you start a season NBA Live, it asks you what you want as a direction for your club. Rebuild, Develop, or Contend.

          JOb is trying to contend while everyone else is in rebuild/develop mode. Like I've said many times. I can take losses when young players get big minutes. In the end they will either develop, or they won't. Either way you learn a lot about them, and find out what needs to happen in the future.

          Troy Murphy is who he is, and playing him big minutes pushes back the development of younger players, doesn't allow you to evaluate them, nor decide if they should be a part of the future and if so what role they are capable of performing.


          Other than saving money, what positives come out of keeping him around? None.



          I agree, a good coach will adapt his style of coaching that play to his current players strengths , rather than their weakness

          Not the other way around
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            Troy Murphy is who he is, and playing him big minutes pushes back the development of younger players, doesn't allow you to evaluate them, nor decide if they should be a part of the future and if so what role they are capable of performing.


            Other than saving money, what positives come out of keeping him around? None.

            EDIT: And now he say's they need faster players. No what they need is a different coach.
            What players? Solo? Hansborough who is getting his minutes? McBob? Though he might deserve more play. Hibbert? Please get me started on him. Foster has been hurt, so be glad Solo has recieved any burn.

            So my counter question to you what are the positives to firing Jim? This team is better off finishing season with Jim. After the season is over then we do what we should do with Jim, but now this very sad team would not benefit from changing the current scheme because that will only cause more confusion learning a new scheme mid-season. Jim's biggest weakness is his lack of faith in a rotation, so I guess you have a point. It's just not a good time to do this. Last season we had the same problems, so maybe Jim finds a rotation and we finish strong again(Yeah, it's wishful thinking). Not a mark of a terrible coach though.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              This isn't going to end well, is it?
              Depends if you think contending for one of the top-3 draft spots is a good ending or not
              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                Depends if you think contending for one of the top-3 draft spots is a good ending or not
                That thought saddens me too because this draft consists of a very weak class. Maybe, just maybe we get the #1 and land Wall. Yes, that will do.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                  Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
                  That thought saddens me too because this draft consists of a very weak class. Maybe, just maybe we get the #1 and land Wall. Yes, that will do.
                  What? Everything I have read says that this is a strong draft. Much stronger than last year's. The point guards are weak outside of Wall, sure, but there are a lot of athletic big guys that could really help us at the top.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    What? Everything I have read says that this is a strong draft. Much stronger than last year's. The point guards are weak outside of Wall, sure, but there are a lot of athletic big guys that could really help us at the top.
                    Please indulge. I started looking into this year's draft once I realized our team is pathetic, but am not convinced by it's depth.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                      I started a new thread to help educate us on this year's draft, so if you decide to reply put it there. Thanks.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                        I am very frustrated with both the Pacers and Colts organizations right now.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                          Here's Bird's real dilemma:

                          He brought in both this coach and nearly all these players. There is debate as to the GSW trade for Dun and Troy, generally it's considered a Bird deal whenever Dun or Troy play great or when Jackson acts up, otherwise it's apparently all Walsh.

                          Regardless even Foster came in while he was coaching, and he was in the front office when every single player was brought in or drafted.


                          So if it really is the players then who was it that evaluated them? Weren't they bringing in guys that could support a coach and plan no matter what? But now those players need to know that they'll go before the coach goes?

                          That sounds like players with attitude issues, at least in Bird's view, and yet Bird is the one responsible for bringing them in. So either it's JOB's issue or Bird's, and even if it's JOB's issue he was also brought in by Bird.



                          I was a big fan of Rush's game, big fan of Roy's attitude, and have seen lots of potential in Roy after not thinking much of him as a draft pick. However, both have struggled and I think we all know how I feel about the Hans pick. Even Rush I thought was taken a bit too high and I really wanted to the Pacers to trade down and use Dun to help get another 20-30th pick.

                          The point being, for all the credit we have been giving him the results are starting to suggest that the 3 year plan is headed more down than up right now, and that was not expected even by more pessimistic fans like myself or Peck.




                          I do agree with some of you. A vote of confidence might be a step to feel out the situation. Let's say he gets that vote, play continues to be poor or worse, perhaps a player or two are dealt and bad play continues even beyond that...then what? How does that not point a finger right back at JOB.

                          I'm not saying a GM can't make mistakes. They all make mistakes. But there is a clear trend with Bird to somewhat dismiss those errors or refuse to acknowledge them. This thing with JOB sure seems like one of them.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            When you say "mob" that paints the picture as an irrational bunch just out looking for blood. That is as far from the case as possible.

                            JOb is the root of the problem. Look at his offensive designs. What are they? They highlight the skills of players like Troy Murphy, and put players like Roy Hibbert on the bench. The message is too shoot the ball when open. Players like D.Jones aren't good shooters. TJ isn't a good shooter.

                            etc
                            I'm with S86 here. How is complaining about the roster and/or coaching of a bottom 5 team, one that's trending to end up closer to bottom 3 right now, considered to be a "mob" mentality or impatient.

                            S***, I'm still going to games that cost me a fair amount of cash in tough economy. I'm as invested in the team as I could possibly be, so it's not like I'm just knee jerking. And that describes a lot of other core PD people for sure.

                            So certainly I'm as against the flip-flopping from game to game as anyone, but this isn't the same thing. This is losing badly and then doing it again and again.


                            "Plagued by injuries?" Doing the best with what he has? Yes, because once again we must totally ignore the brawl season which featured Ron totally out, JO out for 15 games to start and then a bunch more injured, Jackson out for 25, Tinsley out for a ton of games with "injuries", Reggie and Foster starting the year injured....I mean good lord people, let's get some perspective here.

                            It's Granger and a start without Dunleavy. Well they freaking didn't even have Dun last year and did have Granger out for some games last year with injury. Quis was one of their top defenders and missed his usual ton of games.

                            It's just stupid to view the team this year as held back by injuries. If anything we saw some better play without Dun or Troy even out there and there appears to be depth to the roster, at least compared to the starting talent levels.


                            Carlisle kept showing up at the top of the COY voting specifically for winning with roster issues and players coming up bigger than expected (including Ron's only AS and DPOY season). It's time for JOB to start proving his worth.

                            The Houston Rockets called and told JOB and Bird to freaking man up already. The Pacers have about as much input from Yao and TMac this year as the Rockets do. Houston is flipping 18-13 right now with guys like Brooks, Scola, Ariza, and Battier...oh, and somehow they find a way to get low draft picks like Landry and Budinger significant playing time without losing as well.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              I'm with S86 here. How is complaining about the roster and/or coaching of a bottom 5 team, one that's trending to end up closer to bottom 3 right now, considered to be a "mob" mentality or impatient.

                              S***, I'm still going to games that cost me a fair amount of cash in tough economy. I'm as invested in the team as I could possibly be, so it's not like I'm just knee jerking. And that describes a lot of other core PD people for sure.

                              So certainly I'm as against the flip-flopping from game to game as anyone, but this isn't the same thing. This is losing badly and then doing it again and again.


                              "Plagued by injuries?" Doing the best with what he has? Yes, because once again we must totally ignore the brawl season which featured Ron totally out, JO out for 15 games to start and then a bunch more injured, Jackson out for 25, Tinsley out for a ton of games with "injuries", Reggie and Foster starting the year injured....I mean good lord people, let's get some perspective here.

                              It's Granger and a start without Dunleavy. Well they freaking didn't even have Dun last year and did have Granger out for some games last year with injury. Quis was one of their top defenders and missed his usual ton of games.

                              It's just stupid to view the team this year as held back by injuries. If anything we saw some better play without Dun or Troy even out there and there appears to be depth to the roster, at least compared to the starting talent levels.


                              Carlisle kept showing up at the top of the COY voting specifically for winning with roster issues and players coming up bigger than expected (including Ron's only AS and DPOY season). It's time for JOB to start proving his worth.

                              The Houston Rockets called and told JOB and Bird to freaking man up already. The Pacers have about as much input from Yao and TMac this year as the Rockets do. Houston is flipping 18-13 right now with guys like Brooks, Scola, Ariza, and Battier...oh, and somehow they find a way to get low draft picks like Landry and Budinger significant playing time without losing as well.
                              Screw it,

                              Lets all march to Conseco like the old days!!!
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                                O'Brien's job is secure. :shakehead
                                "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X