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

Time for Rick to follow through

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

  • #61
    Re: Time for Rick to follow through

    Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
    LOL at the JO love. Yeah he can never be the fault for a problem. Face it, JO is not doing his job and if he is doing his job then his job is to be a role player because thats all he is doing.

    You can't hold JO and Al to the same standard, JO needs to out perform dramatically Al thats what he is paid to do and I don't see it, yeah Als % is worse but he gives us versatility with the 3.

    Besides JO has shot 50% or better 9 times this year, Al has done it 13 times. JO has a tendency to have really high highs or really low lows. Als being closer to being called consistent is a desirable trait.

    And don't even try and hold his rebounding against him, Al is doing just fine for what should be expected, if you thought he was going to be getting 10 a night you had no clue who he was.

    Al is being Al, he is payed to be a role player and he is performing as such just like Tinsley and Jack. Every player on our team plays like a role player, problem is one is paid to be more.
    LOL at someone blaming Jermaine O'Neal for problems right now. JO needs to dramtically outperform Al eh? JO is averaging 4 more points, 4 more rebounds, basically 3 more blocks than Al Harrington and as you said is shooting a higher percentage. I would say he is clearly outperforming Al. And as far as having really low lows how about Al's game early this year where he scored ZERO points and then against the Bobcats where he has ONE rebound. You're post couldn't be any more ridiculous if you tried.


    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Time for Rick to follow through

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I want an efficient, productive Tinsley out there, not the chuckstastic version we've seen lately.
      Me too...but I think Tinsley's hand has been forced. He misses a lot of good shots some times. Shots that he needs to take to keep the defense honest. Us not having shooters hurts here.

      Also, Tinsley has a lot of games like the Charlotte game. Maybe not a great/efficient game but still, not horrible. He was 5-12. I'm sure that at least one of those shots was one of those good shots that I mentioned that he took and just missed. He was also 5-10 from the FT line. That kills you. Obviously he needs to step up and making the easy shots and FTs. Still, he's been getting to the line and giving himself good shots because no one else on the team is stepping up to that position. Also, Tinsley completely took over the game when we fell behind by double digits in the third. He single-handedly got us back in the game. Stuff like that doesn't show up in the box score. Everyone else seemed ready to just roll over and die right there but Tinsley kept fighting.

      This is why I like his play. At least the man is trying. He just needs another scorer so he doesn't have to score. JMO.

      Also...JO hating right now is just ludicrous. I'm not even going to dignify it with a response.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Time for Rick to follow through

        Originally Posted by Dat Dude
        BBall said Jermaine has a player option for next year, I'm 90% sure right now the way things are going Jermaine is going to opt out and take less money to go to a winning team.
        Bball has heard JO has an option for next year but Bball isn't saying it as absolute fact.

        I believe it was Peck who pointed out that on one of the websites that track NBA contracts they show JO with an option.

        Assuming that's true, it has crossed my mind we might actually be seeing a player in a 'contract year' so to speak. As you said, it wouldn't be a surprise to see him opt out.... altho I don't know if he'd plan on taking less money. I'd think he'd play his butt off this season and hope to get more money (from us or elsewhere).

        -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


        • #64
          Re: Time for Rick to follow through

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          More on Tinsley in December

          Of the 6 main scorers on the team, guys who scored 100 or more points for the month (JO, Al, Jack, Tins, Granger, Foster) Tins ranks...

          last in FG% (37.4)
          Yet he's taken MORE FG THAN ANY OTHER PACER this month

          fifth in 3P% (30%) - JO is 0-1
          He's taken 50, Jack 52, Granger 57, Al 62, so all most as much as guys shooting it 40%. Jack is even at 34% for the month.

          last in 2P% (40%)
          He's taken the 2nd most 2P shots this month, behind only JO

          last in PPS (1.08) - Granger 1.51, Jack 1.30 lead the way

          fifth in FT% (67%) - Al's disgusting 57% has him beat...but Tinsley has shot the 2nd most FTs in the month (behind only JO). So a ton of wasted trips to the line.

          Among the 11 players to get 50 minutes in the month Tinsley's Adjusted FG% (factoring in the benefit of making a 3) is 2nd to LAST ahead of only Foster's 37% (and that got a thread all it's own it was so troubling). Mel Mel is at 41%. Guys like Jack, Al and Danny are above 50%. DG is 62% in fact.

          Tinsley has the benefit of NOT HAVING TO PASS TO HIMSELF, the worst shooting option on the team, yet still only put up 6.2 apg for the month. Jackson and JO combined for 5.9 assists per themselves.

          Tins is tied for 19th in APG in the NBA for December, certainly not enough to make up for the awful shooting he put up. For the month he's running 30th in A/TO ratio among players getting 15 mpg or more (bench, but not scrubs). I mean JAYSON WILLIAMS has been more careful with the ball the last month while handing out nearly as many assists.

          Just taking Tinsley's shooting out of the season totals moves the Pacers FG% from 43.4 to 44.1 and up 3 spots in the overall rankings, and that's including Jackson's terrible first month still (which got him benched let's remember).


          I want an efficient, productive Tinsley out there, not the chuckstastic version we've seen lately.
          I have felt like this the last few weeks, but I couldn't exactly get a hand behind it. Great post! I want Tins to shoot less and pass more. It's ridiculous that he's the player that hoists the second most shots on our team, while he's not a very good shooter in the first place.

          He's a very effective and spectacular passer and knows how to get to the line. I want him to focus on those two and the occasional open shots to keep defences a little honest. Yes, I know he's not the best FT shooter this season, but I trust he can better himself on that side of the isle.

          Even though this criticism of Tinsley's current game I must admit that I am VERY happy with him playing every game so far this season. Keep it up Tins!

          Regards,

          Mourning
          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Time for Rick to follow through

            OK so Tins shoot less...... who's gonna take the shot ?

            one of the reasons his ast aint averaging 9+ is because recipients miss open shots, not even an arm in the face, just miss or miss catching a pass chest-high.
            Tins taking "more" shots is because the coaching staff wants it, not Tins, seen how many lay-ups he's passed out of? handing the ball to jeff or JO for a dunk while he could easily lay the ball up himself ?

            Tins is the last player on this team to "look" for "his" shot, however many a time he has to, because no one is making one.
            If the team shoot 36% for the game and Tins 39% then there are people on the team doing worse, whether combined or solo.

            We would have had a lot worse record if it wasn't for Tins.

            At this moment the team has 2/3 players giving it all with some or a lot of success, Jeff, Tins & JO, the rest is miles behind, be it that Jax is catching up at times.
            Al is nowhere near, as he already admited several times this season there isn't a shot he doesn't like but what's worse for us is that he plays no defense, only gets rebounds when they fall in his lap or he can wrestle them from another Pacer adn sticking a hand in the air for a shooter is defintely considered a futile action by Al.

            Granger shots a few to many 3's and I don't care at what percentage he shoots, he can drive and should do it more often.

            Our bench with regularity now loses leads, scores pathetic and has to many "changing" highlights, as in no consistency, while all of a sudden Quis is playing well, others dissapeared, though the hustle from DA is appreciated and worth a lot, Baston up and coming, we still have nothing "worth while" from the bench.

            And while I appreciate more players in the league scoring like monsters, adn a lot more then JO, I still think JO is playing MVP quality ball atm because he brings it on both sides of the court, and makes the players around him better.
            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Time for Rick to follow through

              Originally posted by rexnom View Post
              Me too...but I think Tinsley's hand has been forced. He misses a lot of good shots some times. Shots that he needs to take to keep the defense honest. Us not having shooters hurts here.
              Sometimes this is true. However, I don't think Tinsley is the best one to be forcing shots. Tinsley's AVERAGE is 38% from 2. There are 11 players on the roster who shoot a better pct. He shoots 33% from 3, and those usually come when he is wide open. I think JO, Jack or Al posting up would result in more points and, maybe more important, more fouls on the opponent. I think Granger or Al could force more 3's and hit 30%....and 30% from 3 is actually a lot better than 38% from 2. It's a difference of at least 10 points during the course of a game.

              Also, the fact Jack is averaging 3.2 assists and JO is averaging 3 assists indicates that assists are not that terribly difficult to come by. As a team, we are above average in assists, even though our PG is merely average. This is even more perplexing since we are well above average in 3pt pct. and have one of the best post players in the game.

              I think Tinsley could find a way to give it up more often. I also think he could play better D, but that's another topic.

              Originally posted by rexnom View Post
              This is why I like his play. At least the man is trying. He just needs another scorer so he doesn't have to score. JMO.
              Yes, I think he is trying. I really like the effort and fearlessness out there. The fact he has played in every game is great. I have always liked his ball handling and passing. He is an entertaining guy to watch who can penetrate any defense. These are the main reasons I don't consider him the main problem to address. However, there could be adjustments to how he is playing IMO.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                [quote=bellisimo;521034]
                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                I'm not on the same boat....that's pretty much being a fan of the Bobcats...sure they might have a few nice games here and there....but when its all said and done...they'll be at the bottom of the league....
                They'll have a "Good" team before the Pacers do, believe that.

                Rebuilding sucks, but treading water with mediocre veterans sucks more because the promise of potential and development isn't there.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                  Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                  They'll have a "Good" team before the Pacers do, believe that.

                  Rebuilding sucks, but treading water with mediocre veterans sucks more because the promise of potential and development isn't there.
                  Hmmm. I did not post that.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                    Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                    Jamaal Tinsley is the 2nd best player on this team, I dont need to argue with your points. I watch the games I dont need no points.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                      He still is the 2nd best player on this team. Which is very sad, I know.


                      I wonder if Rick still believes in this group.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                        Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                        He still is the 2nd best player on this team.
                        No, he's not. Not this year.

                        Foster and Granger are both better at their positions that Mel is at his. Jack plays better defense, turns it over less, and if you want SAD, Jack shoots it less. The SG. The SG that everyone thinks chucks. That guy shoots less than the 35% FG point guard.

                        There are times I've started to wonder if Tins is even capable of playing better ball than Saras right now.


                        What part of 0-9 in 11.5 half minutes down the stretch plus 0-2 at the FT line didn't just emphasize my earlier post about how much he's been dominating the shooting despite not shooting it well?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                          There is one more point of data that helps make Naptown_Seth's case.

                          Tinsley leads the team in misses. Through the loss to Dallas last night:

                          Tinsley 239 missed field goal attempts
                          O'Neal 235
                          Harrington 230
                          Jackson 218
                          Granger 151

                          Tinsley is 4th in minutes and 3rd in field goal attempts. But he leads the team in misses.

                          Seems like a bad thing to me. Seems to me like he's taking to many shots. Your thoughts?
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold
                            No. There is plenty wrong with Tinsley.

                            First, his shooting pct. is horrible...not even top 10 on the team, yet he shoots too much. Second, his assists totals are mediocre and have gotten worse over his career. Third, he plays horrible defense. Fourth, he has not proven he can play more than 50 games a year. Fifth, he is a poor leader and decision maker for a PG. Sixth, he hangs with guys who do drugs and shoot guns on the streets of Indianapolis.

                            Just a start.
                            That's all you got on the guy?
                            .

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                              Originally posted by indy0731
                              LOL at someone blaming Jermaine O'Neal for problems right now. JO needs to dramtically outperform Al eh? JO is averaging 4 more points, 4 more rebounds, basically 3 more blocks than Al Harrington and as you said is shooting a higher percentage. I would say he is clearly outperforming Al. And as far as having really low lows how about Al's game early this year where he scored ZERO points and then against the Bobcats where he has ONE rebound. You're post couldn't be any more ridiculous if you tried.
                              Could have quoted you, oh wait I just did.

                              4 points whupdee freakin do. 4 Boards, like I said if you expected Al to be getting ten a game you are just clueless which might be the case for a good portion of the board which seems to think oh PF, 10 boards is expected.

                              When Al is making 20 million a year, start whining that he is not playing as well as JO. Now I am sorry if you are a PF/C getting paid 20 million a year, you should have more than 10 games of 20-10. Garnett is the type of player that deserves a max deal and plays at that level. Gets a 20-10 almost every night. HITS CLUTCH SHOTS. And actually leads the team.

                              Gone through less crap caused by him, and talked less about abandoning his team.

                              JO is a very good player, he is not a franchise player, deal with it.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Time for Rick to follow through

                                Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
                                Could have quoted you, oh wait I just did.

                                4 points whupdee freakin do. 4 Boards, like I said if you expected Al to be getting ten a game you are just clueless which might be the case for a good portion of the board which seems to think oh PF, 10 boards is expected.

                                When Al is making 20 million a year, start whining that he is not playing as well as JO. Now I am sorry if you are a PF/C getting paid 20 million a year, you should have more than 10 games of 20-10. Garnett is the type of player that deserves a max deal and plays at that level. Gets a 20-10 almost every night. HITS CLUTCH SHOTS. And actually leads the team.

                                Gone through less crap caused by him, and talked less about abandoning his team.

                                JO is a very good player, he is not a franchise player, deal with it.
                                You know you've picked a real horrible time to come out of the woodwork to bash JO right? He is averaging something like 22, 12, 4, and 4 over the past 9-10 games. Oh JO plays defense too, something Al has completely forgotten the basic principles of.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X