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

Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

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

  • #31
    Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

    Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
    Wonder if Bird has any interest in ownership.
    Yeah he does. He's already tried once and maybe twice.
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

      I tend to agree with what Tbird has to say. The Simons need to stop sitting in the background and do something to fix the mess that is the Pacers organization. IMO it is ridiculous to have both Donnie and Larry running the team. One of them needs to go. It shocks me that I'm about to say this, it doesn't matter which one, but one needs to go. (Actually maybe both need to go, but that's another matter all together.) I'll agree that the team's attitude and motivation is to win. The problem is that it's not working.

      As for comparing the Colts to the Pacers they've both had their periods of sucking. The cold hard fact is in the 20 some years the Colts have been here they have a championship. It took the Pacers 20 some years in the NBA to get to the finals where they lost and haven't had a serious sniff of the finals since.

      Don't make the mistake of blowing off my post by thinking "she's just a Bulls fan". I used to be a Pacers fan. I used to be one of the fans who would cheer on every play. I used to do anything I could to get the night off from work so I could go to a game. Now I have league pass so I can watch other teams play.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

        T-Bird, the last guy who called for a culture change got traded to Dallas.

        Be very careful and keep your ears open.


        PS: I agree with you

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

          Originally posted by ABADays View Post
          Yeah he does. He's already tried once and maybe twice.
          Yes he tried to get the Bobcat franchise when it was starting. I laughed my butt off when he didn't get it. Karma being karma Larry ended up here.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

            Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
            My problem with the Pacers compared to the Colts is that they DON'T EVEN TRY to make fans across the rest of the state. All they care about is the Indianapolis market.
            In the past they've tried having preseason games at various places around the state. I went to the one at Purdue during Damon Bailey's days "as a Pacer." The whole arena (except me) booed every time Damon touched the ball.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

              I think that people are a little to picky here.

              I have wanted to blame the Simions.

              But it's easy to. We had a losing season.

              But what was it like the 1rst time in 10+ years we didn't make the playoffs or something like that? This team has had problems the past few years. The Simions do need to take a stance on that. But really, they have done a good enough job. They are owners capable of owning a championship level team. This team had that chance in the late 90s and then a whole other Pacer team had the same chance just a few years later but the brawl crushed our chances, that team only had one chance to win the title and that was the 61win season.

              Let me say this, I am not happy with the job Larry and Donnie have done.

              Donnie has had a good track record. The teams he put together in the 90s and that re building job he did in the early 2000s that kept us in the playoffs was AMAZING.

              However, hiring Larry Bird as President is a very bad move. I just have that feeling that Larry doesn't know what he is doing.

              Here is my problem with what Donnie and Larry have done lately.

              - Took no stance on Ron Artest when things started going south. They just have let it get as bad as it could.
              - When they finally traded Ron they were still trying to hold on to the hope that the team could win. Ron was a key piece to those teams, no way could we just stick another player, even Peja or Al, in his spot and win.
              - Larry says after last years draft that he wants to get more athletic, fine. So he trades 3 seconds (one was Alexander Johnson who had some bright spots for the Grizzles I believe) for James White. However he obviously is stupid for doing that trade if it turns out that James couldn't even beat out anyone else on the team. Really, I didn't mind us getting him I liked it, but when you trade up like that you have to know what you are doing.
              - We trade Croshere for Marquis, future 1rst for Al, all signs that we want to get more athletic. Ok so what happens at mid season? We trade two athletic players in Al and Stephen Jackson for 3 guys who are not athletic. On top of that Murphy is overpaid and Dunleavy is at a position we don't need. Which leaves us without a shooting guard. Now I understand getting rid of Stephen, that was good. But it's the fact that it's like Larry changes his mind of what type of team he wants on the court.

              History has shown that the Simions are good owners. History has shown that Donnie is a good GM. To me history has shown that Larry has no clue what he is doing.

              I think I brought it up before at how crazy it is that NBA coaches get fired all the time when 3/4 of the time it is not their fault but teams panic. Well I think that a lot of us on here have paniced. Just stop and relax and think about it. You can't argue with the success that the Simions have had as owners. If all the owners in the NBA were ranked the Simions would be in the top 15 no doubt.

              Sure the Pacers are not as popular as the Colts but the NBA is no where near as popular as the NFL atleast around here. I am about the only person I know with a favorite NBA team. Maybe like 1 or 2 other people but that's it. The NFL is very popular now a days especially if you are the Colts.

              And T-Bird mentioned a culture change. You don't need to fix what's not broken. IMO, The Simions and Donnie are not broken. Larry is or will be shortly. The players have changed a lot the past few years, I believe that Jermaine, Jeff, and Jamaal are the only ones who have been here more than 5years.

              I understand that everyone is frustrated but just relax and realize it's our turn to suck and learn lessons the hard way. Things won't happen overnight.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                If I were a Cub fan, I sure in the hell, would be upset with the owners of the Cubs, but come on the Simons?


                Put it this way, no Simons, no Indiana Pacers, so Tbird's analysis, however well written is wrong. IMO

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                  Tbird, your post was very well written. I do disagree with several of your assumptions/arguments. Lets look at the facts. This was the first year since I believe 1994 the Pacers missed the playoffs. That's an amazing run, even with no championship to show for it. During that time how many times did the Pacers go deep in the playoffs? Keep in mind the Bulls and Lakers each had very talented teams during this time and the Pacers still remained very competative. How many times was Walsh regarded as one of the best GM's in the business by the fans, media and other GM's around the league. Just a few years ago we had a team with the best record in the NBA, only to lose a tough series to a very good Pistons team. Now, all of a sudden the fans jump ship (see attendence) because the team has two average years? Now Walsh, Bird and the Simons have "lost touch" with this team and the NBA? Give be a break. If you were Bird or Walsh would you be in a hurry to get ride of Artest if you didn't absolutly have to? He was a terrific player with a wonderfull salary. Granted he had some personal issues but there were many Pacer fans, myself included, who though he was worth the risk becasue of what he could do on the court. I mention Artest because when he requested a trade a few years ago thats when a championship level team was forced to re-tool on the fly. Don't mean to ramble but I think everyone needs to settle down and lets see what the Pacers do this offseason to improve the team. Lets not lose faith in the people who put the Pacers on the map to begin with.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                    Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                    However since that day, I struggle to find a really good move the franchise made. There have been some OK ones (AC for Daniels, drafting Granger though IMO that borders on a miracle), but most were bad.
                    3. Knowing you have trouble at PG and knowing your starter has had repeated health issues, you trade away a very dependable backup PG, pretty much for nothing. Then you don't draft Marcus Williams but pick up a SF when you already have Granger.
                    i disagree about granger. there was something that made other GMs pass on him and the pacers decided to take him anyway. i don't consider that a miracle. it took some recognition of talent on their part to make that pick. the shawne williams pick is more debatable because shawne has ended up being a nice prospect (i'm not on the bandwagon yet but 98.2% of the digest seems to be) but we could have drafted rondo - maybe should have.

                    however the problem with most people who question this move yet in the same breath praise the colts... drafting shawne williams is something the colts probably would have done. the colts have made a habbit of not necessarily drafting for need... look at this year, drafting reggie wayne, dallas clark... they draft for depth so that when they let players go they can maintain success by bringing in another player. obviously it works differently in basketball - but there is something to be said for giving ourselves young talent to develop and possibly trade down the line.

                    2. Acquiring Al Harrington. Dumb move. He wasn't going to fit with the team - the one position you were set at was PF and you knew he was going to want the ball. But TPTB wanted to hand the fans a 6'9" pacifier instead of trying to find a shooter or PG with the TE.
                    at the time they were finally able to acquire al, there was almost nobody left in free agency and most of this board felt they had to do something after losing ron/peja. i disagreed at the time - i felt al was a big mistake. i would have preferred to use the TE at or near the deadline. it would have been interesting to see who we could have traded SJax for with the TE (jason richardson instead of murphleavy?)...

                    btw DK, love the 6'9" pacifier line...


                    But even then things weren't horrible. Your contract situation was OK, you had some young pieces and there was hope it might somehow fit together - and if it didn't, you could at least swing some deals.

                    Then you traded Harrington & Jackson for two poorer players with horrible contracts.

                    Jackson had to go. That was easy to see. IMO he should have been told to stay away after the Rio incident but the Pacers decided to tell the world that their whole summer ad campaign was a steaming pile of ...

                    Anyway, IMO Jackson should have been gotten rid of for peanuts. Barring peanuts, buy him out.

                    Harrington? He didn't fit and was a bad acquisition but he is a talent - and maybe with Jackson gone Granger could spend some time at SG. I don't think that's the best spot for him but you do what you have to. And even if that didn't work, keeping Al would give you a lot more flexibility in dealing JO this summer, if that's the way you decided to go - at least you'd have the position covered.
                    .........agree

                    Management has screwed up, repeatedly and badly, multiple times over the last 3 years. Things are bad and prospects for improvement in the near future aren't good. But Carlisle takes the fall. Not Walsh or Bird. Walsh led the team out of a dark time 20 years ago but you can't live on that forever. It's time for new management - except I think the Simons have pretty much given Walsh a lifetime contract.

                    Also, I've said this repeatedly, as have others. I'm sure Walsh would be drinking champagne as much as anyone if the Pacers won a title but IMO his goal has never been to win the title. His goal has been to be consistently good. If given the choice between making a move to give his team a shot at the title or making a move that would help insure the team would be good for the long term, he'll take the second choice every time. He made that decision when he traded AD for the draft pick that would become Bender, he made that decision in the summer of 2000 (that team had at least 1 and maybe 2-3 more runs in them) and he made it again when he didn't sign Brad Miller - or even make him an offer. I know that's a major issue with Pacers fans.

                    Unlike Tbird, I don't blame the Simons for much of this, except for Walsh's eternal job security. They haven't been afraid to spend freely and have deferred to DW to make basketball decisions - mostly anyway. But things are bad in Pacerland and getting worse - and the blame lies squarely on Donnie Walsh (Bird was his hire so if Bird sucks it's because DW made a suck hire).
                    i tend to think the blame should be shared equally by donnie, larry and the simons. i'm not always a ric bucher fan but he had an interesting discussion with bill simmons on the "BS Report" this week about how people always wonder why GMs like kevin mchale still have jobs and he said that in a lot of cases its the GM taking the fall for the owners calling a lot of the shots. it was interesting none-the-less. so i don't think any of them should escape blame.

                    We also know by the latest interview I read on PD that he has been working out free agents for the summer league team, and no doubt has been at least somewhat involved in the personnel machinations currently taking place...

                    Jim O'Brien is personally working out guys for our summer league team, guys who won't likely play much for us this season, and almost surely won't be members of our roster when and if we become championship contenders again. How does this drive our fan base and grow it.....how will this change the culture from an organization who seems content to me of being just barely into the playoffs to a team on the leading edge of a decade or more of championship runs every season?
                    maybe i misunderstand how free agency works, but would o'brien be working big name free agents? wouldn't he only be working out free agents for the summer league? do we have a lot of players on our team currently that should be in the summer league? ike, but he won't be. shawne definitely. orien definitely. david maybe but it doesn't sound like he will be. then... we don't have draft picks, rawle is a FA... we've got to fill the team somehow. i don't think he'd be working with mo williams or chucky atkins, the pacers would just sign them not work them out with a coach.
                    Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 06-24-2007, 11:51 PM.
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                      How is it directly the owers fault? Did they make sole decisons? Or is it the constant ebb and flow of weighty contracts? Could they have pulled a trade for McGrady with Bender and Artest? The culture of the NBA does not call for pushing against what is available. Before this year I see a few moves they could have made differently. The TE is one. Instead of moving in haste and bringging in a player that we are log jammed at, the Pacers should have weighted till the Trade Dealine or this coming draft to use it. They weighted too long on the other TE (James Jones I think) but everyone in the league would be drooling at that TE.

                      What type of deal could we have gotten with that TE and all of our players from the GS trade?

                      Would it put us in a better position? With the extra draft pick, the TE, Stephen Jackson, Cabbages, Daniels, Williams, and Granger could we actually get a true sidekick to JO. Could we get Ray Allen? Paul Pierce?

                      I really do not think we would have much leverage anyway. There is no desire to play here from marquee players. There is no way we could have gotten AI. Nor would we want him for that matter. My point is just because some of the decisons made by the Pacers were horrendous, does not mean that an alternative would give them a championship. We need scouts who know talent. We need a system that we can plug in talent ,instead of systems to go with our lack luster talent. We need a culture change in the NBA, cause the Eastern Conference is not getting any better (Portland and Seattle can attest to that). Most of all we need Reggie. No I do not mean for Reggie to come out of retirement. We need a leader on the court. We need a player that the city can embrace. JO is not that player. Artest had the talent and passion, but his direction was....well skewed. We need a Duncan. We need a LeBron. We need a Shaq. Go ahead and throw in a Riley, Jackson, and Pop. But please Pacers no more average Joes.......


                      Oh yeah and if you could turn this team around in 30 seconds that would be WHAT I WANT.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                        One more thing.

                        I believe someone or some people mentioned that if we don't get new ownership this team will be leaving Indy....LMAO! Yeah right please don't tell me there is someone who actually thinks that.

                        The Simions don't suck so bad as owners that they can't keep this team in Indy where they have been....forever. We just got a new arena not to long ago and that is usally the issue, it's why the Sonics and Kings may be moving here soon.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                          I believe the Simons and Walsh have always strived to make the Pacers a 2nd round or better playoff team. I believe that is their "line in the sand" in terms of "anything less and we're doing something wrong" in the big picture. If they're at that point, they'll play conservatively, but if they still feel they can safely try to improve upon what they have, they will. But I believe getting out of the first round is their minimum expectation in the grand scheme of things.

                          Now I'll tell you two things I think in regards to that:

                          1) It is unlikely we will ever win a title that way
                          2) It's a hell of a lot better than mediocre, which is where I strongly disagree with the first post. Mediocrity is .500 basketball and you have about a 50/50 chance on average of making the playoffs as a 7th/8th seed. I don't think TPTB get enough credit there.

                          Now people who feel it's championship or bust are doomed to be disappointed 99.9% of the time because that's just not a realistic goal, as much as we all want it to be. Even among the cities with the greatest advantages (the big cities and the big and warm cities, the ones with loose-pocket owners), think about how many teams have won the title, either recently or at all.

                          Now think deeper. What all had to happen for them to win? Was it one set formula that only they pulled off correctly, or as I believe Naptown Seth pointed out, was it all relatively different formulas, and even then they don't promise a title? The answer is the latter. You can make good moves, you can have the great players, you can have the right coach, but even when ALL those things are in place, it takes a whole lot of good fortune just to get it done.

                          The 2007 Spurs might not have made even the Conference Finals if Amare and Boris don't run out onto the floor.

                          The mighty 2000 Lakers don't make it to the Finals if they don't mount a major Game 7 comeback (which more often than not, doesn't work out the way it did for them).

                          The 2004 Pistons don't beat the Pacers if not for getting Rasheed Wallace on sale.

                          The 2005 Spurs don't win if Robert Horry (not Duncan, not Ginobili, not Parker, not a special play or scheme by Popovich) doesn't slay them in Detroit.

                          The 2006 Heat were all but dead and buried until their last-chance comeback in Game 3 vs a Dallas team that probably should have won that series in 5 games.

                          How do you think the Lakers felt when that (I think they were even sub-.500) Rockets team upset them to move on to the Celtics back in the day? How about the 1999 Heat and the 1999 Pacers at the hands of an 8th seed New York team?

                          How about the 67-win Mavs team of 2007 losing to the Warriors?

                          My point in all this, and each example you can go back and forth on for sure; I'm not speaking as the know-all here; is that in the game of basketball (and in any sport really) it's NEVER as simple as making the right move, or having the right players, or getting the right coach.

                          There is no magic plan to being a title contender. It is EXTREMELY hard to win a title, and to call out a franchise for not winning one is just not right or fair.

                          If the powers that be were being cheap (they are not) and happy with being an over-achieving low budget team a la the Clippers most years (they are not), then I would agree with you. But that isn't the case. Could they be more aggressive? Yes. Should they? It depends on how you look at it. I feel they could do things differently, but that doesn't make it correct to say they settle for mediocrity.

                          I'm rambling, and I need to do this over with more organization and clarity. But I'm tired and it will have to wait so I'll leave you with this:

                          If all that Donnie Walsh and the Simons were about was playing it safe and being average, they would never have made the 2002 Bulls trade to and taken Artest in the deal. And they certainly wouldn't have re-signed him to a new deal later on. Because contrary to seemingly popular belief, they are not blind idiots. They knew everything about Artest that we know, hell they know a lot more I'm sure. BREAKING NEWS: That was a risk they took to win it all. They knew they were dealing with a nut, but they gambled on his abilities and lost. There is no disputing that as far as I can see. People want to write them off as morons who couldn't see water if they were standing on a boat, and that we the fans are the only ones with the clarity to see Artest's problems, but that's just not possible or true. Walsh knew what he was doing: Gambling. Gambling to win the thing you all demand: A championship. It didn't work, and we're still recovering. Now "wonder" why they're not hot to play with fire so soon after Ron's departure? If you think about it long enough, it's not a surprise at all.

                          Things may not be heavenly in Pacer land, but man of you need to clean the mudd of your dark-tinted glasses. It's much better than you think. What's forgotten is the many levels that exist in between the only three many of you seem to think are crammed right together next to one another: Championship contender, Mediocre, and Awful.

                          [/Rant]

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                            You go Mal!

                            You're the man!

                            "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                              Love that Mal post...my stance is usually that our ownership and president and GM suck...but they suck a whole lot less than most. As bad as they've been over the past 20 or so years, only a few front offices, IMO, have done a better job simply virtue of the fact that almost everyone is terrible.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                                I'd never call out the team for not winning a title and I doubt T-Bird actually meant it that way himself. It's about the direction and positioning you put yourself in. It's about whether your vision and work are realistically pointing to being a contender or a pretender.

                                Just making the playoffs is fools gold. It's a recipe for mediocrity.

                                Walsh's job was done sometime in the late 90's. That was as far as his style was going to get a team. After that, accomplishments (Finals) were more in spite of him than because of him. If that wasn't clear then, it should be clear now in hindsight.

                                Adam's brilliant line about the Simon's loyalty to Walsh being the ruination of this franchise is exactly right. These past 7 years should have removed all doubt.

                                There are many ways to win a championship, and none of them are in Walsh's playbook. He would never risk his comfort zone for a shot at the brass rings.

                                His best work is behind him. WAY behind him. He parlayed some years of a bad basketball team (before him), some draft picks, and a fanbase with nothing to lose into a team that rose to contender status under Larry Brown. But he never had the extra gear to take it forward. He single-handedly short-circuited our best chance and for that I will never forgive him. He didn't do the Bender deal because he thought we had everything to gain... he did it because he totally misjudged the situation and thought we had nothing to lose (IMO).

                                Once the bar was raised, he was out of his league. To using a sporting phrase "He was playing over his head".

                                His reputation should be taking a hit and rightly so. If the Simons allow this to continue (bad management) then we will soon need League Pass to watch the Pacers play. IMO it is just that bleak. And don't think I'm giving Bird a pass here either. The two-headed monster has been part of the problem, not part of the solution.

                                Pacer marketing is awful. Pitiful.

                                The team hasn't been a team we could be proud of since 2000 (and I hate to take anything away from Reggie's final season but it was Reggie we were proud of, not some of the cast of fools around him).

                                Right now this is like watching the Titanic. We're sinking and nobody has done anything but rearrange the deck chairs and paint the railings.

                                Donnie Walsh has operated this franchise under one goal:
                                Make the playoffs.

                                His second goal is:
                                Don't do anything to risk the first goal.

                                The fact that he admitted he thought the team was done in '99 and he was surprised by their 2000 Finals appearance should've been a BIG clue that he'd reached the end of his effectiveness and whatever vision he had was by then clouded.

                                This team needs some dynamic vision and management to energize the fanbase. We can't put lipstick on the pig any longer. We need someone who understands 21st century Indianapolis, Indiana, sports, the NBA, and basketball in general. "Dynamic" and "Walsh" are two words rarely ever spoken together.

                                As T-Bird rightly says, after a while you need to set your sights higher to see just who keeps enabling this mess that we are in. The Simons have to sign off on our management consortium. Walsh might've earned the benefit of the doubt to mishandle the team heading into 2000, but he did nothing to prove that was a fluke. Instead, he's proven that his window of effectiveness was closing shut by the end of the 90's and now he's just a bad manager being coddled for work he did 20 years ago. Wrong team and wrong time.

                                The masses better start clamoring for the Simons to do something... and hope the Simons listen. If the status quo is maintained, we can wave bye to the Pacers. It's time to get our heads out of the sand and realize just how far we've fallen and what that means in the current state of pro sports in general. The sunshiner position is not part of the answer, it's a big part of the problem. The casual fans aren't going to support a loser, especially one without any rudder or vision, and the sunshiners are never going to be enough to keep the doors open on Conseco.

                                Grace's position should be a wakeup to everyone.

                                Either the core demands changes and accountability, and hope that the press follow suit and ownership listens (and acts), or we'll have no one else to blame but ourselves when Conseco no longer houses an NBA team.

                                It's that simple.... and that serious.

                                -Bball
                                Last edited by Bball; 06-25-2007, 03:48 AM.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X