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

JO trade scenarios.

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

  • #31
    Re: JO trade scenarios.

    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
    Has JO really regressed that much? (Answer: No.)

    I don't think my list is stuck in the past. Rather, I think I'm being less-myopic that many of these lists.

    C'mon, he's in the "Elite, but Limited or Have Question Marks" category.

    Looking at your 10-20:

    Pierce - great stats on a losing team (something that has plagued Brand every year but one. Brand is benefitting, while JO suffers, from the What have you done lately? category.
    Bosh - I'm not sold on him yet, let's see what he can do in the playoffs before we declare him to be better than JO
    Shaq - I continue to disagree with the exaggerations of his demise
    Parker - better than JO? No.
    Ginoboli - I think he's top-ten, replacing Pierce from JayRedd's list
    Yao - better than JO? No.
    Amare - I think he's top-ten, replacing McGrady from JayRedd's list
    Marion - better than JO? No.
    Gasol - Would Memphis homers even argue that he's better than JO? Debatable.
    Redd - No.
    Allen - No.

    I find it bewildering just how much Pacers' fans do not appreciate JO.

    Its not that the SG that replaces Reggie in the Pacers' lineup has a hard act to follow, but it seems to me that the fans are not ready to embrace the Franchise Player that replaces Reggie.

    And that's a shame, because a lot of you are ready to toss away a great, great NBA player for reasons that are not really his fault (questionable coaching/ gameplans, a mis-matched team/ utterly bad lockerroom chemistry and relationships between players & coaches, coaches & management, players & management, and possibly even within management.
    Frankly, I'd hate to think of how bad this team would've been this season WITHOUT JO's efforts to hold it together.

    Jay, no offense because you know I respect you but IMO you are running the risk of becoming J.O.'s Uncle Buck.

    There are some real & serious flaws with O'Neal both on & off the court that the Pacers have to deal with.

    I will paraphrase Isiah Thomas's words to J.O. the summer before he was fired. He told J.O. to not work on jump shots or rebounding or passing or anything basketball related. He told him to try & be a better man.

    To J.O.'s credit he appeared to take that to heart. There have been things beyond his control & dealing with Artest surely would tax anybody. But let's not make him out to be an angle either. There have been plenty of stories of J.O. conducting his personnel business on a cellphone while the team is having a meeting or coming to practice late & leaving early.

    We've all seen the guy on the floor. He believes that he is due respect from every player & official that has ever lived because he is an all-star. Do you think he gets mad at physical play because he doesn't like physical play or because it offends him that the refs. let players play like that against him.

    Remember his first press conferance here? You know the one he talked about winning the M.I.P., the M.V.P. & being an all-star but somehow never got around to talking about trying to win a title.

    Does all of this make J.O. evil? No, of course not.

    But let's not just say people are discounting him because of the coach. Yes, I feel that Carlisle's system sucks as well. But I am also NOT convinced that Jermaine's ego would allow him to be a cog in a wheel. I still believe the team has to force feed him in part to keep him happy as much as it does it because Rick likes that kind of offense.

    I will now ask you the same question I asked U.B. years ago about Ron.

    Do you honestly believe that Jermaine O'Neal would be happy winning but not being the focus on offense & not being an all-star because his #'s were down to say 16ppg?

    Can you honestly say that Jermaine would willingly step back for another player?

    What's ironic about this situation is that you do realize that it was J.O. who finally convinced Walsh to move your boy Jalen for Ron don't you?

    I guess I get if you think the tides have turned to much against J.O. that you feel the need to defend him. But let's not annoint this guy for Sainthood.


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

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: JO trade scenarios.

      Originally posted by jcouts
      I will embrace JO when he starts making the players around him better.

      As much as Ron needed to go, and I will not argue for a moment that he did not, he made JO and everyone else better players when he was in the game.

      JO has never made anyone around him a better player when he has been in the game. Some would even argue that he makes players worse right now.

      If he changes that, I'll embrace him.
      Agreed. And that brings up another point. Why is Ron not on the list? The list is obviously based on talent, not personality.

      Now, if I were making up a list, I'd probably base my list of who is better than JO on which players I'd be willing to trade JO for in a 1-for-1 trade.

      If that were my criteria, at this time Branch and Bosh would both rank ahead of JO in my book. Ron, because of his lack of self-control, would not.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: JO trade scenarios.

        I am so happy to see you guys givin Arenas his respect. He was the fourth leading scorer this year and its just amazing what he can do when the games on the line.
        STARBURY

        08 and Beyond

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: JO trade scenarios.

          Originally posted by blanket
          I've advocated a JO to Golden State deal for a while now. I think this kind of package would be a good one:

          Richardson and Diogu, plus one of the following: Pietrus, Biedrins, or a future 1st round pick.
          I would love to get Pietrus and Diogu here as they seem like Indiana's type of players. Would absolutely love it. Jrich isn't bad either though. We would still need help at PG but Rich and Pietrus fill the 2 and 3 rather nicely when you put them with Granger and jax or peja.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: JO trade scenarios.

            Originally posted by JayRedd
            I think the better question is whether he's even Top 20. These guys are all at least debatable: Iverson, Yao, Arenas, Vince, JKidd, Marion, Amare, Bosh, Carmelo, Manu, Tony Parker, Artest, Chris Paul, Chauncey, Jerome James (just checking to see if you're paying attention)
            Sure do feel like a retard here quoting myself, but since yall adopted my list, I just wanted to make sure yall know where I stand. I'd put a few of these guys ahead of him (prolly Yao, JKidd, Amare if he comes back well, and Paul), but I'd say he's definetely a Top 12-20 player in this league, depending on my mood that day. And that's plenty good enough to build around as long as you can get another guy in the Top 30 along with him.

            There's nobody in the league, nor has there ever been, that can get team results on individual talent. I take nothing away from JO that he can't carry this mediocre at best roster deep into the playoffs. He needs help in the form at least a Manu Ginobli level talent. It takes one or two elite guys and a supporting cast of at least 2-3 other very solid NBA ballplayers to make a contender. JO is just as good as he was a few years ago, which makes him one of the best big men in basketball. That's probably the more important "ranking" to do, because as someone else said, you can't really compare JO to a guy like TMac or Paul Pierce when the talent is fairly comparable.

            So which Bigs are better than JO (who I agree with Jay is being underrated now as much as we were overrating him three years ago):

            Definetely Better
            Duncan
            Shaq
            KG
            Dirk

            Probably Better
            Amare
            Yao
            Brand

            Might be better or too young to tell
            Bosh
            Howard
            Ben Wallace


            So it's reasonable to argue we have a Top 5-8 big man in this league. I think that's good enough to build around. We just have to get him a real perimeter side-kick--Peja and Danny are not gonna get it done.
            Read my Pacers blog:
            8points9seconds.com

            Follow my twitter:

            @8pts9secs

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: JO trade scenarios.

              Many of you seriously underestimate Yao Ming. Did you notice his development this year, even in a slow-motion offense without much help due to injured teammates?

              Tell me why JO should be above Yao in anyone's list?

              His first 4 years have shown steady and dramatic improvement:

              Yao

              02-03: 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.7 apg, 1.79 bpg, & 29 mpg
              03-04: 17.5 ppg, 9 rpg, 1.5 apg, 1.9 bpg, & 32.8 mpg
              04-05: 18.3 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 0.8 asp, 2.0 bpg, & 30.6 mpg
              05-06: 22.6 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.5 apg, 1.66 bpg, & 34.7 mpg

              Kevin Garnett in his early years:

              95-96: 10.8 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 1.8 apg, 1.64 bpg, & 28.7 mpg
              96-97: 17.0 ppg, 8 rpg, 3.10 apg, 2.12 bpg, & 38.9 mpg
              97-98: 18.5 ppg, 9.6 rpb, 4.2 apg, 1.83 bpg, & 39.3 mpg
              98-99: 20.8 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 4.30 apg, 1.77 bpg, & 37.9 mpg
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: JO trade scenarios.

                Realistic fans bash JO, yes!!!
                STARBURY

                08 and Beyond

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: JO trade scenarios.

                  Originally posted by pacertom
                  Many of you seriously underestimate Yao Ming. Did you notice his development this year, even in a slow-motion offense without much help due to injured teammates?

                  Tell me why JO should be above Yao in anyone's list?

                  His first 4 years have shown steady and dramatic improvement:
                  Agreed. He was an absolute animal after the All Star Break this year, averaging 25.7 ppg and 11.6 rpg on 53% from the floor.
                  Read my Pacers blog:
                  8points9seconds.com

                  Follow my twitter:

                  @8pts9secs

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: JO trade scenarios.

                    I find it bewildering just how much Pacers' fans do not appreciate JO.
                    I am bewildered why anyone would think that is the case. We all think he's a top 25 player, most think top 20, I could even go up to 17 or so.

                    I see this topic discussed on forums not involving Pacers fans and trust me, JO is not among the top 20 names mentioned, EVER.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: JO trade scenarios.

                      Originally posted by jcouts
                      I will embrace JO when he starts making the players around him better.

                      As much as Ron needed to go, and I will not argue for a moment that he did not, he made JO and everyone else better players when he was in the game.

                      JO has never made anyone around him a better player when he has been in the game. Some would even argue that he makes players worse right now.

                      If he changes that, I'll embrace him.
                      I'm not one who'd go so far as to say he makes players around him worse, but I'd definitely agree he does not raise their level either in on-court performance or in terms of team chemistry/motivation a la the leader role.

                      He's a nice guy and talented player. I see eye to eye with those who are putting him between 18-25 in the best player lists (despite the futility of making such lists).

                      Maybe some of us undervalue him. However I submit some on this board may be to soft in their criticism going so far as to consistently deflect any responsibility for the team's situation away from him. Yet he is supposedly the leader and franchise player.

                      My opinion continues to be that he is most suited to the #2 guy role as far as offensive option and team captain/leader/glue role. He should be the dominant #1 rebounding/interior D guy.

                      I'm not saying it's all his fault. Simply that he must factor into the team's difficulties to a reasonable degree. The same can be said for the coach, as well.
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: JO trade scenarios.

                        Not sure how everybody can criticize JO for his "leadership abilities". Have you guys seen what happened to this team over the last two years? Between the two-year Ron Artest saga and all the injuries, this was barely even a team. And you expect JO just to pick everyone up on his shoulders and make them all play with happy smiles on their face or get healthy or take this mediocre roster to the 2nd Round? If you want a leader that could have done that, you might want to go find General Patton or Martin Luther King, Jr. Because I'd like to here your suggestions as to what other NBA player was going to "lead" this roster under these circumstances to anywhere other than a first round playoff loss.

                        I'm not trying to argue that JO is, in fact, a terrific leader. I'm just wondering what all the naysayers base their "JO's Not a Leader" idea on. Has he had a legitimate chance to even attempt to "lead" this team since Reggie (the unquestionable leader, character and face of the Pacers for over a decade) retired?
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: JO trade scenarios.

                          Originally posted by JayRedd
                          der these circumstances to anywhere other than a first round playoff loss.

                          I'm not trying to argue that JO is, in fact, a terrific leader. I'm just wondering what all the naysayers base their "JO's Not a Leader" idea on. Has he had a legitimate chance to even attempt to "lead" this team since Reggie (the unquestionable leader, character and face of the Pacers for over a decade) retired?

                          Yes he has... First he had the 2004-2005 season once he returned from suspension. Then he had the 2005-2006 season where he had the path cleared for him by the departure of Reggie and Artest eventually PLUS he had the experience of the 04-05 season to build on (where he should've known he came up short and had an idea what he was going to need to improve upon in leading the team).

                          Alas, he failed miserably and helped create a black hole where other players either naturally rose to fill the void or forced themselves into it. That's a big part of the problem. The position was handed to JO on a silver platter and then circumstances gave him a situation where he could really grab the reins and instead he fell off the horse. That itself created turmoil and doubt IMHO.

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

                          ------

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

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: JO trade scenarios.

                            Guys that I rank ahead of JO -
                            Pierce
                            LeBron
                            Dirk
                            Carmelo
                            Billups
                            McGrady (but not if his back is completely shot by now)
                            Yao
                            Brand
                            Kobe
                            Wade
                            Shaq
                            Garnett
                            Howard
                            Iverson
                            Nash
                            Marion
                            Stoudemire (if he isn't ruined)
                            Duncan
                            Ginobili
                            AK47
                            Bosh
                            Arenas


                            That puts JO at #23 for now.
                            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: JO trade scenarios.

                              Originally posted by Bball
                              Yes he has... First he had the 2004-2005 season once he returned from suspension. Then he had the 2005-2006 season where he had the path cleared for him by the departure of Reggie and Artest eventually PLUS he had the experience of the 04-05 season to build on (where he should've known he came up short and had an idea what he was going to need to improve upon in leading the team).

                              Alas, he failed miserably and helped create a black hole where other players either naturally rose to fill the void or forced themselves into it. That's a big part of the problem. The position was handed to JO on a silver platter and then circumstances gave him a situation where he could really grab the reins and instead he fell off the horse. That itself created turmoil and doubt IMHO.

                              -Bball

                              I don't think you're being handed something on a silver platter when you're asked to lead a team that has been devastated by suspensions and injuries one year, and then Artetst asking for a trade and more injuries the next.

                              JO will be handed something on a silver platter when he gets a better team around him. I'm not the biggets JO fan, but he really hasn't had the best scenarios for the 2 past seasons.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: JO trade scenarios.

                                Originally posted by Peck
                                Jay, no offense because you know I respect you but IMO you are running the risk of becoming J.O.'s Uncle Buck.
                                No offense to UB, but I probably won't fall into that role.

                                There are some real & serious flaws with O'Neal both on & off the court that the Pacers have to deal with.
                                I agree with this. I'm just trying to counter-punch the prevailing (yet myopic and wrong) opinion that JO is not even a top-twenty player in the NBA.

                                I will paraphrase Isiah Thomas's words to J.O. the summer before he was fired. He told J.O. to not work on jump shots or rebounding or passing or anything basketball related. He told him to try & be a better man.

                                To J.O.'s credit he appeared to take that to heart. There have been things beyond his control & dealing with Artest surely would tax anybody. But let's not make him out to be an angle either. There have been plenty of stories of J.O. conducting his personnel business on a cellphone while the team is having a meeting or coming to practice late & leaving early.
                                Yeah I agree, but I believe that happens on just about every team with just about every superstar. Its a serious problem, but when these guys get interested in endoresements and non-basketball-related businesses, they get distracted. Like when Dale and Mark opened that clothing store in the Hyatt. Just play ball, guys.

                                We've all seen the guy on the floor. He believes that he is due respect from every player & official that has ever lived because he is an all-star. Do you think he gets mad at physical play because he doesn't like physical play or because it offends him that the refs. let players play like that against him.
                                I understand and agree somewhat. I think he doesn't like physical play because he's worried that his body won't hold up and therefore he won't be able to prove just how great he really is. And I believe that's become a self-fulfilling prophecy. He certainly needs to shut-up-and-play, on a consistent basis.

                                Remember his first press conferance here? You know the one he talked about winning the M.I.P., the M.V.P. & being an all-star but somehow never got around to talking about trying to win a title.
                                Now you're just upset about that because it was Dale who just left town. So perhaps we just replaced one me-first guy with another.




                                Does all of this make J.O. evil? No, of course not.

                                But let's not just say people are discounting him because of the coach. Yes, I feel that Carlisle's system sucks as well. But I am also NOT convinced that Jermaine's ego would allow him to be a cog in a wheel. I still believe the team has to force feed him in part to keep him happy as much as it does it because Rick likes that kind of offense.
                                I disagree. But that's the portion of this discussion that is the most "fun." I think Rick's role in this problem is vastly underrated.

                                I will now ask you the same question I asked U.B. years ago about Ron.

                                Do you honestly believe that Jermaine O'Neal would be happy winning but not being the focus on offense & not being an all-star because his #'s were down to say 16ppg?
                                I don't know, but I also don't think it would be in the Pacers' best interest for JO's scoring to drop that far. Unless he were to become a 16-14 guy. But I think that if we can get him to 14 rebounds per game that his scoring will go up, not down. Frankly, he doesn't take an absurdly high % of the team's shots (less than 20% of the team's shots during this season's playoffs; during his last full season he took 22% of the teams' shots. Contrast that with guys like Kobe that take one-third of their teams shots - LeBron is at 29%, Duncan is at 22% or so - he's missed enough games over the past couple seasons for misleading results, Dirk is at 25%.)

                                Can you honestly say that Jermaine would willingly step back for another player?
                                I don't think he would. But keep in mind, I don't think that's the right course for fixing the Pacers (finding a player better than JO to play *with* JO.) Besides, if we trade JO we can't get a better player than JO. Who the else are we going to trade that will net us a player that JO *should* take a back seat to? That was a fair question regarding Ron - we already had that player in JO. But as Jesse Jackson said on SNL, "THE QUESTION IS MOOT!"

                                What's ironic about this situation is that you do realize that it was J.O. who finally convinced Walsh to move your boy Jalen for Ron don't you?
                                Yeah. I won't dispute that Jalen was clearly not working out well in the new/ Zeke & JO-led Pacers era.

                                I guess I get if you think the tides have turned to much against J.O. that you feel the need to defend him. But let's not annoint this guy for Sainthood.
                                Agree. I'm mostly talking about the over-the-top bashing of him solely because he wasn't able to single-handedly save the Titanic from sinking whilst DW, Bird, and Rick were pouring extra water into the boat.

                                Originally posted by pacertom
                                I see this topic discussed on forums not involving Pacers fans and trust me, JO is not among the top 20 names mentioned, EVER.
                                He's had a rough couple of years, and his stock has slipped because of the numerous injuries and the overall villification of everyone involved with the brawl.

                                Thus, I keep refering to this as a myopic problem.

                                They're just plain wrong if they think a healthy JO is not a top-twenty player.

                                If he gets the support he needs (from Foster's future replacement, whomever that is), it will be fun to watch everyone declare that JO "is back."

                                His game hasn't changed. Rick (along with Stan Van Gundy) has fully exposed a weakness we knew was there (his passing).

                                Ron has exposed that JO still needs to mature as a leader, but we knew that, too.

                                Trade JO and KG straight up and make no further roster changes, and the best either team is going to achieve is a first-round playoff exit.

                                So, come on, everyone else needs to drop KG out of their top twenty and then I'll shut up about this. Deal? Ditto for Bosh - does anybody really think Bosh could've led this team any further than they got?

                                BTW, I really don't like the new merge feature.
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X