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

Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

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

    Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

    http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?story...rc=desktop&wjb

    INDIANAPOLIS -- Long after his playing days have ended, Larry Bird remains extremely competitive. The idea of giving up on a season certainly is not in his DNA.

    All-Star forward Paul George (broken leg) has not played this season, and yet, the Indiana Pacers are still fighting for a playoff spot.

    Bird, the team's president, expects George to come back. He also expects his team to make the playoffs.

    The Pacers have lost six straight games and play four of their next five on the road. Yet, Bird is optimistic.

    "Anytime you lose five in a row, it's probably not the best thing, but we've had our ups and downs this year, and there aren't a lot of people that are expecting a whole lot," Bird told ESPN.com on March 23. "I still think we should make the playoffs in the East. I don't know how many wins that's gonna take, but we do have enough talent to make the playoffs, and it would be disappointing if we don't."

    During a wide-ranging interview, Bird discussed the Pacers, his appreciation for Russell Westbrook, his disdain for tanking and, as always, he shared some terrific stories.

    ESPN.com: Russell Westbrook has been averaging nearly 30 points, 10 assists and 10 rebounds per game for over a month now. You've put together similar stretches during your career. What do you think of what he's been able to accomplish?

    Larry Bird: Here's a young man that has had serious injuries -- bad knee injuries throughout his career -- yet every time he walks on the court, you know you're going to get 100 percent from him. He attacks, he's fearless and he plays the way it should be played, so I'm all for him. I hope he wins 10 MVPs in a row. I just love players that compete on a nightly basis and really take the challenge to their opponents.

    ESPN.com: You and Russell obviously play two different positions, but does he remind you of yourself in terms of his competitiveness and will to win?

    Bird: I don't know. I just think that my opinion about basketball, the way I was taught, was when you step on the court, you play to win. Now, if you're not supposed to play to win, then they shouldn't keep score. If they didn't keep score in these games, I wouldn't have played as hard as I did. But I do think this is our job. We know that we're going to be hurting years down the road. He knows that he's going to be hurting years down the road, but he can't help it. He has to play that way to be effective, and he knows that.

    ESPN.com: Stephen Curry? James Harden? Anthony Davis? Who do you like for MVP?

    Bird: It's like every other year. There are always a lot of candidates. I like all of them. I like all of our great players. I really do. On any given night, one of them can be special. But like with Russell, he's been special for a month. But he's been special his whole career, too. The MVP, I think, just like the All-Star teams -- somebody's going to get left out. I don't follow it that close, but there's so many players you can choose from, and you couldn't go wrong with any of them.

    ESPN.com: You were able to build the Pacers through the middle of the draft, which has typically been extremely difficult. There's really no one perfect way to do things, but when you hear the word "tanking," what's the first thing that comes to mind?

    Bird: It makes me sick to my stomach. For somebody that's been in this league for over 30 years, I don't think that's the way you do things, but that's my opinion. Everybody else has got their opinion. I've read in the past here where people thought we should lose on purpose. I don't believe in that. I've never believed in that. If I ever get that way, I'll be out of the game.

    ESPN.com: That's just your competitive nature?

    Bird: This is a competitive league. These players are paid large sums of money to perform at a high level. And when you come in and tell them, "We're tanking, and we're not playing to win tonight," what does that say for your league? It is what it is, but my opinion of it is, play to win. That's the way it is.

    ESPN.com: You guys have hit on a lot of guys who have stayed in school -- Danny Granger, Roy Hibbert and Solomon Hill. Is that the direction you like to go in?

    Bird: I don't think it's a direction. I do like four-year guys, though. They're low maintenance. They already know what the league's all about. We've taken some young guys -- Paul George, Lance Stephenson, and both of them are very good players. I don't think every draft we go in and say we've got to get a four-year guy or a three-year guy. It's really who's there. I know in Danny's situation, we followed Danny's career pretty closely. And I know when he came in here to work out for us, it was more of a favor to come in here than it was that we had an opportunity to draft him. I think we were at (pick No. 17) that year (2005), and we thought he was gonna be taken in the top six. But he slid to us and we knew about his knee injury and everything. It was pretty easy. If you saw the way Roy played his freshman year, you would've never dreamed he'd be on an NBA court. But the improvement, the work ethic he displayed, showed us that he'd be the best player he possibly could be by sheer work and force. Then, you take a lot of the other guys on our team -- David West was a four-year guy. It's just so much easier.

    ESPN.com: Why did you decide to keep your team's core intact at the trade deadline?

    Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

    ESPN.com: Why do you think your team has been able to stay afloat in the playoff race despite not having Paul George all season?

    Bird: We do have some talent. The additions of Rodney Stuckey and C.J. Miles really helped us. Once they became acclimated to what we were trying to do, they played a lot better. But you're still missing your best player -- and when you do that, it takes a lot away.

    ESPN.com: You've had a lot of different guys step up this season in Paul George's absence. Who has been the biggest surprise?

    Bird: I've been watching Rodney Stuckey for eight years now, and when you watch players from other teams you know how good they are, but you see them every day and you know they're really good. And I think C.J. Miles has had problems with injuries throughout his career, but our training staff is getting him pretty healthy and he's going to be here all summer, so I look forward and I look out for the big picture. We are going to have a good draft pick -- whether we're in the playoffs or not, we're gonna get somebody that can help us. And we'll just go forward with that, and we think we're gonna be pretty good next year.

    ESPN.com: You had two seasons where you shot 50 percent from the field, 40 percent from 3-point range and 90 percent from the free throw line. Is it crazy that Kyle Korver -- albeit as more of a star role player, so to speak -- is chasing 50-50-90 right now?

    Bird: Yeah. That's hard to do. It's really hard to do. And he's not really a go-to guy, but when he does have an opportunity to do what he's supposed to, 50-50-90 is pretty tough. That's a tough get. You don't see that too often in our league. It used to be 50-40-90. It's just like triple-doubles: I never really thought about it back when I played. I just played. But you go into halftime and you'd be like, "Man, I got it going tonight," so you knew you had it going, and it didn't always have to be scoring. My game was, the more I was involved in everything, the happier I was. That's right around trying to steal the ball, rebounding, passing and obviously scoring was a big part of it. But there were a lot of nights I didn't feel I had to score for our team to win.

    ESPN.com: Did you always have the mindset that you didn't care if you scored or not as long as you were making your teammates better? Sounds like LeBron James.

    Bird: I used to go out and play, and I tried to see what we needed. LeBron's the same way. He looks at the game a little differently than most guys, and he's got that mentality where if somebody's open, he's going to get them the ball. That's the way the game is supposed to be played. That's just called fundamentals. When you're young, everybody wants to be this and be that, as far as scoring and doing their thing, but as you get in this league and you look around, you go, "Damn, those guys want to have a piece of their pie, too," and if they get their piece, you're going to be more successful. There's no question about that.

    ESPN.com: Rick Carlisle had a funny story about you recently. He told Boston.com that the last game you ever played was in 2000, when you were coaching the Pacers. It was a 4-on-4, half-court game -- you and the older guys on the team against some of the younger guys. It was best two out of three. You hit the game-winning shot, fell to the floor and the guys piled on top of you. And that was it. What do you recall about that?

    Bird: I think it was me, Chris Mullin, Rik Smits and Derrick McKey against Al Harrington, Austin Croshere, Jonathan Bender and I can't remember who the fourth one was (Jeff Foster was a rookie at the time), and we beat them pretty good. It was the last time I played, because they didn't knock me down on the floor. I fell on the floor. I was tired (laughs).

    Rick didn't tell you about the time two little kids were out here, and we were leaving the arena and he said, "Why don't we stop and beat those two little guys? Let's go." They were probably 13 or 14 years old. He threw me the ball and I took off running hard, and I pulled a hamstring. I think it was the year before that 4-on-4 game. I was gonna quit then (laughs). I had never had a pulled hamstring before.

    ESPN.com: March 12, 2015, was the 30th anniversary of your 60-point game. What do you remember about that day? You have downplayed that performance, too.

    Bird: It wasn't that good of a game. I like the hard-fought, scrappy games, pound it inside. It was just a loosey-goosey game. It was a pretty close game, as I remember. We weren't up 20, 25, but we were up 10 the whole way, and it just wasn't a good game. I ran a 5-mile race two days before that, and actually, I was very sore. My legs were really sore. I wasn't tired or anything, but I was really sore.

    I knew I was gonna play that night. I just didn't know how effective I was going to be. But once I started going, I was making shots. But it just wasn't a fun game to play in. It wasn't my type of game.

    ESPN.com: What was your type of game? What's the one game that stands out?

    Bird: I don't know if it was my best game, but the one I enjoyed the most was Game 6 of the 1986 NBA Finals. I had control of the game (Bird finished with 29 points, 12 assists and 11 rebounds as the Boston Celtics captured the championship that night over the Houston Rockets). I could do anything I wanted to do. It was a meaningful game. I knew if we won, we'd win the championship. The series was tough. You lose a lot of sleep during that. You're tired. But that's one game I always felt that in a big situation like that, I always performed at a high level.

    ESPN.com: How were you able to rise to the occasion time and time again in big spots?

    Bird: I don't know. Because going into those games you never knew what was gonna happen. But I always had enough confidence in my game and I put the time and the hard work. I never really felt the pressure. The only thing I was always worried about was how I was going to perform, because I wanted to perform at a high level for myself. And you never knew that until you stepped on the court.

    ESPN.com: During that 60-point game, when did you know you had it going?

    Bird: I knew I had it when Kevin McHale scored 56 a couple weeks before (on March 3). I knew I was gonna get there one day. (Bird told reporters, "I'll break that record in no time." And he did.) But Kevin left that game with I forget how many minutes left. He could've had a lot more.

    ESPN.com: When you think of Larry Bird, you think of all the numbers and the accolades, but you also think of the trash-talking, too.

    Bird: Yeah. I don't know. Some of the stories I remember. Some of them I don't. It's probably just nervousness, talking. But if I had something to say, I said it. But if you knew our team, I thought Cedric Maxwell and Kevin McHale talked more junk than I did. Danny Ainge, too. They were always talking.

    ESPN.com: What was the best McHale trash talk you heard?


    Bird: Kevin McHale, one time, did one of the dirtiest things anybody can do to an opposing player. He told his buddy, a college friend, a teammate (at one point) at the end of the game in Golden State we were up pretty big -- and we were just getting ready to go out of the game -- and Kevin told him when he came in, he said, "When you get the ball in the low post, you just turn and shoot it over me, and I'll just act like I'm defending you." Sure enough, they threw it in there, he turned and Kevin batted the shot about six rows up into the stands. And I mean I felt so bad for the guy, and the guy was pissed. And I went over to (Celtics coach) K.C. Jones and I said, "Get me out of here. This kid's out of control, this kid's out of control." It was the worst thing I'd ever seen on the basketball court, but that's why I remember it to this day. You don't do that to your friend (laughs).

    ESPN.com: With Dominique Wilkins, you had that funny line on that retirement video that you were pretty sure his statue wasn't in a defensive stance. What made him bring out the best in you?

    Bird: I don't know. Dominique was a talented player. I remember when he first came into the league, he was able to jump. He did a lot of his damage off of two feet when a lot of guys go off of one. Jordan was a one-leg jumper, he was a two-leg jumper. I never jumped, so I didn't have to worry about it (laughs). But he was very skilled, did a lot of spinning in the lane and elevated and he was a helluva player. In this league, every night, being the guy I was, I always took a challenge because I knew every night I had to prove myself, usually against pretty damn good players.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

    I love the McHale story.

    That's a great story, about the 14 year olds. Could you imagine? I know I couldn't, but there are probably random people out there who've done crazy things, like play Bird and Carlisle in pickup ball.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

      Larry is probably my fav NBA player of all time, but the fact that he still thinks the right thing to do is to hold onto Hibbert and West says it all. I have lost confidence that he knows how to put together a Title contender.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

        Originally posted by presto123 View Post
        Larry is probably my fav NBA player of all time, but the fact that he still thinks the right thing to do is to hold onto Hibbert and West says it all. I have lost confidence that he knows how to put together a Title contender.
        Sounds to me like people at the deadline tried to stick him with some albatross contracts and he wasn't interested.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

          Originally posted by presto123 View Post
          Larry is probably my fav NBA player of all time, but the fact that he still thinks the right thing to do is to hold onto Hibbert and West says it all. I have lost confidence that he knows how to put together a Title contender.
          Or maybe he understands it's better than the alternative. Did you read what he said next?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
            Sounds to me like people at the deadline tried to stick him with some albatross contracts and he wasn't interested.
            Pretty much this...

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

              I can understand the folks that think Bird should trade half or all his players away any season we don't win the title, however, trading for bad contracts normally does not get you any closer to the Finals.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                I took it as though he was saying if they opted out the Pacers would have payroll flexibility and he didn't want to eliminate that by taking back big contracts.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                  I think it's wishful thinking that David and Roy are going to opt out from his view, but he may know something that we don't, especially in Roy's case.
                  "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                  ----------------- Reggie Miller

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                    Disappointing that the interviewer can't keep the focus on our team, and needs to expand the interview topics to Bird the player.
                    I mean didn't even get to the topic of how awesome George Hill has been this season.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                      Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                      Or maybe he understands it's better than the alternative. Did you read what he said next?
                      Bird has a definite advantage over us, he knows if and what kind of interest there was at the trade deadline. He may have a potential deal lined up for the summer.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                        this doesn't have anything to do with the q&a
                        but this is at least as important!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                          Originally posted by sav View Post
                          Bird has a definite advantage over us, he knows if and what kind of interest there was at the trade deadline. He may have a potential deal lined up for the summer.
                          Well Larry is crafty I'll say that. People thought he was fine with George Hill at point guard, until we found out the FO made a serious play for Reggie Jackson at the deadline. That could mean George was gonna move to 2 guard, but you can't really read Larry. He could be positioning himself for cap space this Summer. That would tie into attempting to trade for Reggie since you believe the re-sign money would be there.

                          But if he suspects West is retiring, and Roy will opt out or be dealt to a team way under the cap or traded in some fashion. Plus we have a top 10 pick.... that's a pretty good cache to have. Right now, I would NOT want to see George Hill be traded this Summer as I feel he can be the third guy. With two elite players, Paul + someone else. But his trade value this Summer might be quite high the way he's playing.

                          I doubt Larry will seek to trade him but if a MAJOR offer is phoned in, I doubt he'd turn it down.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                            Originally posted by timid View Post
                            http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?story...rc=desktop&wjb

                            ESPN.com: Why did you decide to keep your team's core intact at the trade deadline?

                            Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                            ESPN.com: Why do you think your team has been able to stay afloat in the playoff race despite not having Paul George all season?

                            Bird: We do have some talent. The additions of Rodney Stuckey and C.J. Miles really helped us. Once they became acclimated to what we were trying to do, they played a lot better. But you're still missing your best player -- and when you do that, it takes a lot away.
                            THis quote makes my day. In case anyone had any doubt that Larry simply wants to keep this core together for another run at it. I'd agree with him and I think we could be right back where we were last year if he keeps it all together. Nothing is ever guaranteed and it would depend on health, we couldn't have the best record in the east again with anywhere near the # of injuries we've had this season. Larry knows what he's doing and we're lucky to have him in control.
                            I see him locking down Hibbert to another 4 year deal in 2016 which would give us a solid core minus a starting PF. In 2016 we'll have enough cap space to sign our own free agents and still bring in a free agent PF if that's what we need.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Larry Bird Q & A ; ESPN

                              Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                              Well Larry is crafty I'll say that. People thought he was fine with George Hill at point guard, until we found out the FO made a serious play for Reggie Jackson at the deadline. That could mean George was gonna move to 2 guard, but you can't really read Larry. He could be positioning himself for cap space this Summer. That would tie into attempting to trade for Reggie since you believe the re-sign money would be there.

                              But if he suspects West is retiring, and Roy will opt out or be dealt to a team way under the cap or traded in some fashion. Plus we have a top 10 pick.... that's a pretty good cache to have. Right now, I would NOT want to see George Hill be traded this Summer as I feel he can be the third guy. With two elite players, Paul + someone else. But his trade value this Summer might be quite high the way he's playing.

                              I doubt Larry will seek to trade him but if a MAJOR offer is phoned in, I doubt he'd turn it down.
                              Or we take Bird for his word which is almost always the case, and absolutely none of those things happen and we keep our core together. No major changes will happen this summer.
                              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X