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

Is it me or are pacers fans waking up?

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by BillS View Post

    I'm not particularly sure what part of "passion" is losing on purpose for 5 years. I'm also not certain that making huge moves would be considered "passion" if they weren't the exact move you or others want them to make - if they are different moves or if they end up not working out they are just stupid and the same old thing. That's kind of the problem with judging "passion" by results. If Philly ends up having to blow up their team without getting past Toronto or Boston, were they passionate? Did they try or did they just give up?

    Do you have any examples of teams that have not won a championship who have "passion"? I assume OKC (discounting the 1979 Sonics championship), since it seems to be the be-all and end-all of how to succeed in the NBA - that would be the OKC who were once the stupidest FO on the planet for putting themselves in a position to have to let Harden go, or whose do-it-all attitude resulted in Kevin Durant staying there?
    What happens if the Philly and Toronto moves blow up in their faces in the offseason? Or for that matter, Kyrie moves on from Boston. Do folks really look at teams who traded away 2-3 draft picks to contend and are still behind the terrible, awful 6th place never-do-anything Pacers who are in 3rd right now and wish they had done something differently? Herb and Steve have plenty of passion, to keep a pro ball club in Indianapolis and to keep that club competitive while winning as many games as possible.

    For all the talk of tanking and how it's the only way to win a title, I'd love to see the breakdown of the most recent teams to have successfully tanked their way to a title. San Antonio in 1996 when Robinson went down and Duncan was the #1 pick are the most recent success story I can think of. What other tanking teams have won titles more recently? Philly tanked and got Simmons and Embiid, but that has yet to bear fruit beyond a hard fought 2nd round series that would be immediately trashed as failing to compete by the same crowd if it were the Pacers. New Orleans tanked for Davis and that got them? 1 playoff series win in 9 seasons. Phoenix is in the middle of their 9,000th losing season in a row. So far all that has gotten them is a $160M commitment to Devin Booker. Same with Minnesota. Same with Orlando. Shall we continue?
    Last edited by Drew46229; 02-21-2019, 01:33 PM. Reason: Added M to the Booker $ commitment

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by BillS View Post

      I'm not particularly sure what part of "passion" is losing on purpose for 5 years. I'm also not certain that making huge moves would be considered "passion" if they weren't the exact move you or others want them to make - if they are different moves or if they end up not working out they are just stupid and the same old thing. That's kind of the problem with judging "passion" by results. If Philly ends up having to blow up their team without getting past Toronto or Boston, were they passionate? Did they try or did they just give up?

      Do you have any examples of teams that have not won a championship who have "passion"? I assume OKC (discounting the 1979 Sonics championship), since it seems to be the be-all and end-all of how to succeed in the NBA - that would be the OKC who were once the stupidest FO on the planet for putting themselves in a position to have to let Harden go, or whose do-it-all attitude resulted in Kevin Durant staying there?
      Are you seriously this pathetic Bill? Wtf said lose on purpose for 5 years? Do everyone a favor and shut the **** up.

      Jesus Christ I would rather listen to 1000 complaints than your drivel all day everyday.

      Here is a clue: you want this board to stop being the Mohave Desert of conversation?

      Stop running everyone with a real opinion off with your lame ***, boring, hey we beat the TWolves look at my dancing banana nonsense. And maybe take a break once in awhile. Im starting to wonder if you live in the matrix and are just always online.

      btw Bill, Philly is currently #1 in attendence and poised to compete for a long time. So yes, it absolutely worked. And they only nailed 2 of those picks. Imagine if they nailed the Fultz pick as well?
      Last edited by Taterhead; 02-21-2019, 01:38 PM.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • #18
        I think maybe (some) fans that care enough to regularly follow the NBA and games beyond tip off and the final buzzer might be coming to that realization. At least enough of them that you aren't seen as some kind of anti-fan for thinking that the team's ceiling is a bit self-limited. Plus, there's a lot more evidence to point to including a team star defecting by now in the team's history.

        Of course when you allow yourself to go down this rabbit hole it takes away some enjoyment from the game when you're thinking the team is one player or move away from really being special and then that move doesn't happen, or worse, the move that does happen is such a head-scratcher that at best you just kind of have to hope that player is about to be a revelation or that you're wrong about the player.

        The Pacers ownership sets a low bar and shows that it's possible to rather easily reach that low bar. The problem with setting low goals is once you reach them, it's pretty easy to be complacent.
        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


        • #19
          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          I think everyone’s been awake for a long time. Some are content with a good team and others especially those who have been watching the team for 40 years would like to see a title and nothing else really impresses at this point. I am fine with everyone having their own opinions on this.
          Thank you! This mediocre **** gets old.

          if it werent for Reggie Millers superhuman heroics in the playoffs, this team would be one of the shittiest organizations in all of sports.
          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            People ***** like this literally every single year, so no.
            And youve had that stupid profile pic for like 10 years.

            We all have a role to play
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Drew46229 View Post

              What happens if the Philly and Toronto moves blow up in their faces in the offseason? Or for that matter, Kyrie moves on from Boston. Do folks really look at teams who traded away 2-3 draft picks to contend and are still behind the terrible, awful 6th place never-do-anything Pacers who are in 3rd right now and wish they had done something differently? Herb and Steve have plenty of passion, to keep a pro ball club in Indianapolis and to keep that club competitive while winning as many games as possible.

              For all the talk of tanking and how it's the only way to win a title, I'd love to see the breakdown of the most recent teams to have successfully tanked their way to a title. San Antonio in 1996 when Robinson went down and Duncan was the #1 pick are the most recent success story I can think of. What other tanking teams have won titles more recently? Philly tanked and got Simmons and Embiid, but that has yet to bear fruit beyond a hard fought 2nd round series that would be immediately trashed as failing to compete by the same crowd if it were the Pacers. New Orleans tanked for Davis and that got them? 1 playoff series win in 9 seasons. Phoenix is in the middle of their 9,000th losing season in a row. So far all that has gotten them is a $160M commitment to Devin Booker. Same with Minnesota. Same with Orlando. Shall we continue?
              Then they are back to competing with the Indiana Pacers for 6th place.
              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

              Comment


              • #22
                At this point we can get angry about it, but doing so just sucks the joy out of individual games and the season. It basically is... what it is...

                OTOH, it IMO does cause a certain emotional distancing from the team which could be why attendance wanes when maybe you wouldn't expect it. Especially if the position of the OP is accurate and a portion of the fanbase is realizing ownership isn't as focused on a championship as they are and are very satisfied with just making the playoffs.
                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


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                  I invite you to eat one.
                  Gets lonely in your Mom's basement - doesn't it ??

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

                    Gets lonely in your Mom's basement - doesn't it ??
                    LOL, Funny. I was about to respond to that one say "sorry your mommy never loved you"

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                      Are you seriously this pathetic Bill? Wtf said lose on purpose for 5 years? Do everyone a favor and shut the **** up.

                      Jesus Christ I would rather listen to 1000 complaints than your drivel all day everyday.

                      Here is a clue: you want this board to stop being the Mohave Desert of conversation?

                      Stop running everyone with a real opinion off with your lame ***, boring, hey we beat the TWolves look at my dancing banana nonsense. And maybe take a break once in awhile. Im starting to wonder if you live in the matrix and are just always online.

                      btw Bill, Philly is currently #1 in attendence and poised to compete for a long time. So yes, it absolutely worked. And they only nailed 2 of those picks. Imagine if they nailed the Fultz pick as well?
                      So what is "tank" if not losing on purpose? Given the lottery, a single year no longer buys you the automatic #1 pick, plus that pick may not "hit", so 5 years would be about the length of The Process. Heck, Chicago fell off the face of the earth for 10 years and got DRose to show for it - which failed.

                      You do realize Philly spent years with the LOWEST attendance in the NBA while they were tanking, and that was in a metro area multiple times the size of Indianapolis. You can't say "see, this works" until you figure in the number of years where it did exactly the opposite.

                      Here's the thing - if the only thing that matters to you as a fan is winning a championship, then you are going to be miserable most of your time spent cheering for a team. In the NBA, a generational player dominates the league for 7-10 years and if your team doesn't have that player you are pretty much out of luck. Tanking to get that player is a crap shoot at best, and believing that player can be traded for is delusional. Creating a culture of failure with the belief it can be turned on a dime isn't much brighter.

                      As long as the chances are good that my team will not have a generational player - and I've been around long enough to think that Indiana getting a string of #1 picks like Cleveland or Philly even if we won one game a year is as likely as Peck winning the lottery and buying everyone season tickets - then I want the team to be the best it can be in any given season, for risks to be taken when the reward isn't a "what the hell" shot that is being taken just to show willing, and I don't believe being in the LT is the automatic equivalent of "trying hard".
                      Last edited by BillS; 02-21-2019, 02:09 PM.
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by BillS View Post

                        So what is "tank" if not losing on purpose? Given the lottery, a single year no longer buys you the automatic #1 pick, plus that pick may not "hit", so 5 years would be about the length of The Process. Heck, Chicago fell off the face of the earth for 10 years and got DRose to show for it - which failed.

                        You do realize Philly spent years with the LOWEST attendance in the NBA while they were tanking, and that was in a metro area multiple times the size of Indianapolis. You can't say "see, this works" until you figure in the number of years where it did exactly the opposite.

                        Here's the thing - if the only thing that matters to you as a fan is winning a championship, then you are going to be miserable most of your time spent cheering for a team. In the NBA, a generational player dominates the league for 7-10 years and if your team doesn't have that player you are pretty much out of luck. Tanking to get that player is a crap shoot at best, and believing that player can be traded for is delusional. Creating a culture of failure with the belief it can be turned on a dime isn't much brighter.

                        As long as the chances are good that my team will not have a generational player - and I've been around long enough to think that Indiana getting a string of #1 picks like Cleveland or Philly even if we won one game a year is as likely as Peck winning the lottery and buying everyone season tickets - then I want the team to be the best it can be in any given season, for risks to be taken when the reward isn't a "what the hell" shot that is being taken just to show willing, and I don't believe being in the LT is the automatic equivalent of "trying hard".
                        The word tank has never came out of my mouth.

                        I have complained about our cheapskate owner, who has pawned off his expenses and taken advantage of the city and its love of the Pacers.

                        Youre right Bill, soending doesnt guarantee anything, only not spending.......which is what we do.
                        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                        Comment


                        • #27


                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-21-2019, 03:57 PM.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Bball View Post

                            The Pacers ownership sets a low bar and shows that it's possible to rather easily reach that low bar. The problem with setting low goals is once you reach them, it's pretty easy to be complacent.
                            Very well put. Fully agree with this.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                              Thank you! This mediocre **** gets old.

                              if it werent for Reggie Millers superhuman heroics in the playoffs, this team would be one of the shittiest organizations in all of sports.
                              You can use an "if" to try and prove your negative point but you can use an "if" for the other side of the argument too.

                              The Pacers would've had the lottery IF they hadn't been screwed by the frozen envelop during the Patrick Ewing lottery.
                              The Pacers would've made it to the Finals in 1994 IF the refs hadn't called several bogus fouls on the Pacers in the 4th quarter of Game 7 of the ECF.
                              The Pacers would've made it to the Finals in 1999 IF it wasn't for the infamous 4-point play!
                              The Pacers would've made it to the Finals in 2004 IF Jermaine O'neal hadn't hurt his knee during the ECF.
                              The Pacers would've won a Championship in 2005 IF it wasn't for some cup throwing jerk.
                              The Pacers would've dethroned Lebron if Danny Granger didn't injure his knee
                              The Pacers would've dethroned Lebron if Roy Hibbert didn't have a meltdown during the second half of the 2014 season.
                              The Pacers would've dethroned Lebron if Paul George didn't break his leg.

                              The Pacers have put together at least 3 completely different contending teams in the last 20 years and they had a 4th squad trending in that direction before Victor tore up his knee. Not a lot of franchises can say that. My belief is that it's not because they haven't tried or that they didn't want to win a championship, they've had a lot of bad stuff happen to them that derailed their chances of winning.

                              The weak Pacers fan base in Indiana has been much worse than the teams the organization has built. There is no way the season ticket holders would support a 4-5 year rebuild and that is a major factor in every decision the front office makes. If they took that type of risk and ended up like the TWolves or Suns, they would drop to dead last in attendance, I can guarantee it. I've been to games during the Pre-Reggie era where only about 10,000 people showed up to games in the playoffs and we were playing against the Hawks, with Dominique Wilkins!

                              Last edited by naptownmenace; 02-21-2019, 06:34 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                naptownmenace makes at least a few good points. One is that the Pacers were unlucky to not be a franchise to take more of the shine off of LeBron's legacy. Things could have gone the other way with just a little more luck. That just emphasizes to me how tenuous LeBron's legacy really was. He could have been knocked out a couple times or at least once by the Pacers and we really didn't have that dominant of a team. We were very good, but not nearly as good as peak JO and peak Reggie years.

                                But I will say directly to naptownmenace, with the exception of Rik Smits, the Pacers were never built with high draft picks....something that time has shown gives you the best chance for a title. You can look at Duncan, LeBron, Shaq and Jordan as just a few examples. The leaders of several dynasties that gobbled up a great number of rings.

                                And to the rest of you. You can point to the exceptions where Detroit won a title. There isn't another team like them. If you ever want the Pacers to win a ring, you are probably going to have to see them tank. It's about like winning the lottery. You really cannot win unless you buy a ticket.

                                What I'm saying is, if you are happy with the team competing to make the playoffs, great. That's what this franchise is about. But if you think they will ever win a title, you are fooling yourself. Unless the Pacers bring in a different owner, it's not going to happen. If the bring in a different owner though, that team may well head to San Diego or some other paradise without foul weather. So, essentially, good luck winning a title. It's probably best just to be satisfied with a 2nd round exit.
                                Last edited by BlueNGold; 02-21-2019, 07:21 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X