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

Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

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

  • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

    Originally posted by docpaul View Post
    Not to mention... it's freaking Anthony Davis! It's as if people think he's some kind of pedestrian 4 and not some unbelievably talented freak of nature?

    I watched the game on Saturday from the 12th row. There was one play in particular that likely stuck with George... where Davis posted him, easily backed him into the paint and effortlessly shot over the top of him. You could see it on PG's face after the play.

    But I don't know many players in the NBA that can do a whole lot with that... so whatever.
    Exactly! It's one preseason, and by bad/good luck (depending on how you look at it), your first assignment was Anthony Davis. I can understand if he got steamrolled by someone like Glen Davis, Kris Humphries, or Anthony Bennett. Paul George was arguably guarding a Top 3 player who was playing at HIS natural position. Personally, I didn't think Paul George did THAT bad given the highlights that I saw. For me, I would like them to try for 2-3 more games to get a better feel of how it will work.


    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

      Originally posted by I Love P View Post
      This is probably been asked, but is the game on TV tonight? How about if I have NBALP? I have DirecTV and will buy LP tonight if it gets me the game. I've been a LP member for 15 years in a row and am eventually going to buy it but if it means I'll get the game tonight I'll order LP today

      Thanks,
      ILP
      Internetz........

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
        Wait, what? I don't remember reading anything like Roy (or anyone else) requesting a trade. Did I miss something or are you making stuff up?



        I will blame Larry for deciding to change this team's identity and doing it in the most unprofessional way possible.
        "It wasn't completely out of the blue. Hibbert's agent had made a list of teams that needed centers and presented it to Bird, who countered that Indiana would try to accommodate a trade but not take back any bad contracts."

        http://www.latimes.com/sports/lakers...916-story.html

        I don't make things up.

        Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
          Personally, I'm in the camp where he needs to shut up, give 100% effort in the new offense, then discuss it after the preseason is over. George needs to man up, and he already has Vogel's comments about not forcing the issue if it doesn't work. The LEAST that GEORGE can do is give his best effort to see if Indiana has something different to throw at certain teams. In my mind, Vogel and Bird are trying to create a dynamic team instead of rolling out the same lineup night after night.

          Larry is the boss. Vogel is the coach. George is the player. George needs to get with the program.
          I definitely disagree. I agree PG should try it and give 100% but I'll NEVER agree with this whole, "well he's the boss so just shut up" opinion. Is this like an old-school thing? Because a lot of the things in this country would never have progressed to the levels they have with that mentality. We'd still be stuck in the pre-civil rights era.

          But I do think his perimeter defense will be wasted when he's at the 4. Someone earlier said he could still have the same impact in this area. How so?

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

            Originally posted by sav View Post
            I agree, but while we are looking at Paul at the 4, I think we should also look at Solo at the 4. Here's why:

            Solo played the 4 in college so he does have some experience. I know college is different than pro, but at least he has played the 4, Paul hasn't.

            Solo has a body that should be able to take the pounding of traditional 4's, certainly much better than Paul.

            Despite popular opinion, Solo can hit the 3. He shot 37% from 3 last year after GHill returned for the second time.

            Solo is quick enough to drive around traditional 4's if they come out and guard him.

            Solo can guard a player like a LeBron or Anthony if they are playing the 4. If the Pacers want to slide Paul over to guard those guys, Solo is a good enough wing defender to guard traditional 3's.

            In my opinion, Solo is our best option of a stretch 4 this year. I think we should take a look at him and if he works out, we can play him 20-25 minutes per game. Then next summer we can look for a legitimate stretch 4.
            I actually agree 100%. Solo is not good enough IMO to be a 3. He doesn't have the ballhandling ability(neither does PG but he's a much better ball handler than Solo), and he doesn't have the quickness to score against traditional 3's...I actually think he'd be easily the best option for a small ball 4.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

              As Nene has been brought up as someone that PG can't guard, I found this from WaPo Gorat story interesting…

              The Wizards had been successful in his first year in the District, advancing to the postseason for the first time in six years, and Gortat was a vital component. But his opinion changed last season. He noticed teams had figured out how to defend him and Nene. Defenders stuffed the interior, stifling guard penetration and torpedoing the frontcourt’s efforts.

              “It was just too crowded,” Gortat said.

              The Wizards improved from 44 to 46 regular season wins, but the offense remained below average and a restraint on their potential. That all changed in the postseason, when the Wizards unleashed Paul Pierce and Drew Gooden III at power forward for long stretches. The modification yielded an unrecognizably prolific offense. The team’s offensive rating jumped from 101.8, which ranked 19th in the NBA, to 103.3, and the sport’s continued evolution prompted the organization to prioritize adding the proper personnel over the offseason to implement the strategy for the upcoming campaign.
              https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...31444046772949

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread


                Comment


                • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  have Frank Vogel flat out saying there will always be a big man on the court. The team is not smaller this year. More inexperienced? Sure. But they aren't smaller.
                  Can't thank this enough. We still have the option to start Jordan Hill and Ian, which is about as big as we were last season. We can be just as big, just choosing to play small.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    The pistons are streaming all home preseason games live on their website.
                    I see it streaming via Fox Sports Go on the Pistons' site http://www.nba.com/pistons/multimedi...son-livestream

                    Is a local cable account needed?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Absolutely agree.

                      What kills me is the following 2 things in the last couple days:

                      1) The narrative on PD is turning from "Paul can't guard Davis" to "Paul didn't give any effort in guarding Davis" - once again, any failure is always due to goofing off or not caring or whatever. It's funny that no one brought that up until after the comments Paul made.

                      2) When Paul said "I'm not comfortable" he was not only telling the truth he was holding back about how much he really hated it. When he now says "we've talked about it and I'm better with it" he's lying and spinning and giving it lip service and really hates it and hasn't changed his mind. In other words, truth is in what the listener wants to be true - if it matches, it's true, if it doesn't, it's a smoke screen.

                      I also wanted to emphasize this:



                      In other words, he seems to have less of a problem with this than fans do. Unless this is all a lying smokescreen, of course.
                      I agree with all of that.

                      The other thing I keep noticing is comments about his lack of leadership. Personally I'm not really worried about that part, even if he isn't a leader. And I'll give him credit for organizing with the new kids this summer and giving pointers during practices and obviously Paul works out hard and is an example in that department, but beyond that I just don't worry much about what other kind of a leader he is or isn't. I think he's going to play his hardest, I think he's trying to make something work even though he hates it, and I've yet to be convinced he's anti-team. Just speaking for myself I don't need to see the best player be the leader. It's nice if it works out that way, but unless that guy is a specific locker room issue, I don't care much if he isn't a leader.

                      My only concern right now is if Paul just never stops hating this idea and Bird says more things in the press akin to, "Yes you will, and you'll shut up and like it". That's a fast track to a trade request, and what a stupid reason if so. But we're not there yet, and I'm not convinced we ever will be. If the worst it gets is one side saying "I'm not into this," and the other side is saying, "I think it's the best thing," then to me that's not going to cause a breakup here.

                      The more realistic thing to worry about IMO is Paul getting injured guarding bigger players at PF.

                      Other than that, there are basketball reasons to not like this move defensively, and that may be what ultimately ends this experiment anyway.

                      I'd rather they just go with Jordan Hill at PF and be done with it. He's big, he's got a good body, he can rebound, and he can sometimes knock down a mid range shot. As long as you're not asking him to be your defensive anchor at center, I think he'll be so-so at defense. Just do that and let Paul be a SF who occasionally slides down for mismatches.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        I agree with all of that.

                        The other thing I keep noticing is comments about his lack of leadership. Personally I'm not really worried about that part, even if he isn't a leader. And I'll give him credit for organizing with the new kids this summer and giving pointers during practices and obviously Paul works out hard and is an example in that department, but beyond that I just don't worry much about what other kind of a leader he is or isn't. I think he's going to play his hardest, I think he's trying to make something work even though he hates it, and I've yet to be convinced he's anti-team. Just speaking for myself I don't need to see the best player be the leader. It's nice if it works out that way, but unless that guy is a specific locker room issue, I don't care much if he isn't a leader.

                        My only concern right now is if Paul just never stops hating this idea and Bird says more things in the press akin to, "Yes you will, and you'll shut up and like it". That's a fast track to a trade request, and what a stupid reason if so. But we're not there yet, and I'm not convinced we ever will be. If the worst it gets is one side saying "I'm not into this," and the other side is saying, "I think it's the best thing," then to me that's not going to cause a breakup here.

                        The more realistic thing to worry about IMO is Paul getting injured guarding bigger players at PF.

                        Other than that, there are basketball reasons to not like this move defensively, and that may be what ultimately ends this experiment anyway.

                        I'd rather they just go with Jordan Hill at PF and be done with it. He's big, he's got a good body, he can rebound, and he can sometimes knock down a mid range shot. As long as you're not asking him to be your defensive anchor at center, I think he'll be so-so at defense. Just do that and let Paul be a SF who occasionally slides down for mismatches.
                        Good to see you back in action!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          Slick has spoken


                          Guarding him 4 times per year is one thing. Guarding guys bigger every night is another, though. I've listened to Shane Battier and Jared Dudley speak about this, and they both said it's going to make him dead tired, it's going to beat him up, and it probably won't work out in the long term. I'm listening to the guys who have very recently been there and done that. Heck, LeBron himself doesn't seem to like playing PF as much as he does, either, and he has the best body of any NBA player to handle being a "small ball PF". I don't want this for Paul. Dudley is currently out because of a back injury, by the way. Usually the big guys get the bad backs, not the small guys, don't they?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Did you read any of his quotes from Saturday night?

                            " A couple other guys are uncomfortable with how we’re going to run it and things like that. It’s new to everyone.”

                            http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nba/pacers/2015/10/03/pacers-debut-small-sloppy-ball/73085538/

                            This is specifically trying to make it bigger than him. If Paul's got an opinion on it, he needs to keep it HIS opinion and not try to justify it by saying "Well other people feel this way too" This is part of being a LEADER.

                            Drawing lines in the sand is how you divide locker rooms. I am guessing everyone wants to play at a faster pace, whether Paul is the 4 or not, I am guessing that is an accepted truth, so really the only person being affected by this is Paul. He doesn't need to bring up how other guys are "uncomfortable" what does that even mean? It's just Paul being Paul in the end, it should be expected at this point, but he also will need to learn to grow out of those sort of answers if he wants to be a better leader.
                            I think the quote can be interpreted another way. He could be referring to comfort level in terms of just figuring out how to play ball that way. It's an adjustment to play 4 perimeter guys instead of 3, on both ends of the floor, and during the adjustment period it would make sense that some of the guys are uncomfortable with running it that way. This doesn't have to mean, "the other guys hate it, too." Paul even adds himself, "It's new to everyone," and to me that reads as a basketball thing first, not a political/philosophical argument against it.

                            So I can't agree at all with saying it's specifically trying to make it bigger than him. That makes it sound like a scheme to try to win an argument with management, and I just don't think that's what's happening. I think Paul's being honest, and I think this is more face-value than some are interpreting it to be. I'm not saying "Oh, I'm definitely right and y'all are wrong". Nobody 100% knows for sure. But I think it's reasonable to see it as less than nefarious, too. IMO people are reading too far into it and making too much of it. The boring answer may just be the real answer here.
                            Last edited by Hicks; 10-06-2015, 02:10 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              The pistons are streaming all home preseason games live on their website.
                              Excellent info. You're a real mensch.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                OK, thanks for the specific quote. It's hard to keep up with everything when out of town and reading a bazillion reports on my phone.

                                In any event, though, I still read that as "I'm not the only one seeing this", which is a vital part of establishing it as a team thing and not an individual ego thing. Being a leader is not about saying "I feel this way and so it is reality", it's about being able to show you've checked with others to make sure you're on the same page.

                                I find it odd that even with that quote you are guessing that it doesn't affect anyone else but Paul, as if his statement that other guys are uncomfortable is a misdirection of some kind, either from him or from the guys he talked to. I'm also not sure wanting to play at a faster pace but also being concerned about Paul's contribution as a 4 is somehow not only an improbable combination of feelings but also not anyone's business on the team but Paul's.

                                We've become so oversensitized to disagreement that we think any amount of it is a disaster waiting to happen and that talking about it is unprofessional. It isn't - as Vogel said, as long as anything Paul is saying has gone through him and the team first he doesn't care. It's not like Paul is trying to blame being a 4 on his teammates' failures or something - he's just saying some of them feel the way he does. How are we somehow equating this with "dragging his teammates into it"?
                                I don't think this is a disaster waiting to happen. I ultimately think Paul and Larry will get this sorted. I just wish Paul wouldn't make his comments to the media after one preseason game and I wish if he was he'd limit them to his own opinions. That's really my only take.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X