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

Scottie Pippen to release memoir "Unguarded" on November 16

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

  • Scottie Pippen to release memoir "Unguarded" on November 16

    This I'm interested in reading. Not sure how factual it will be though.

    https://nypost.com/2021/06/09/scotti...coming-memoir/

    Scottie Pippen’s memoir seems to throw some big Michael Jordan shade

    Scottie Pippen is telling his side of the Bulls dynasty story.

    The Hall of Famer will expose “stories I’ve kept to myself for years” in his tell-all memoir “UNGUARDED” — out this November — including his rings run with the ’90s Bulls alongside Michael Jordan, which resulted in six championships.

    In the description of the book, Pippen appears to take a few jabs at Jordan and his leadership skills, among other things.

    “Simply put, without Pippen, there are no championship banners — let alone six — hanging from the United Center rafters. There’s no ‘The Last Dance’ documentary,” the description reads in reference to Jordan’s ESPN docu-series about the ’90s Bulls championship seasons.

    “There’s no ‘Michael Jordan’ as we know him. The 1990s Chicago Bulls teams would not exist as we know them.”

    Pippen has publicly expressed his disdain for how the story was told in the “The Last Dance” six-part series, which was co-produced by Jordan’s Jump 23 company.

    Scottie Pippen #33, and Michael Jordan #23 of the Chicago Bulls look on
    Scottie Pippen didn’t agree with how Michael Jordan portrayed the Bulls’ success in ‘The Last Dance.’
    Getty Images
    “Pippen details how he cringed at being labeled Jordan’s sidekick, and discusses how he could have (and should have) received more respect from the Bulls’ management and the media,” the “UNGUARDED” description reads.

    “He discusses what it was like dealing with Jordan on a day-to-day basis, while serving as the real leader within the Bulls locker room.”

    Pippen and Jordan were teammates in Chicago from 1987 to 1993 and again from 1995 to 1998. Jordan presented Pippen when he was inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame in 2010, and the two reunited publicly in 2017, for an event at Jordan’s Flight School camp in California.

    Though, Pippen’s feelings toward his old teammate seemed to turn sour after the release of the “The Last Dance” in April 2020, which painted Pippen as Jordan’s blatant number two.


    Late last year, Pippen revealed he wasn’t a fan of how the documentary turned out.

    “I don’t think it was that accurate in terms of really defining what was accomplished in one of the greatest eras of basketball, but also by two of the greatest players – and one could even put that aside and say the greatest team of all time,” Pippen told The Guardian in December 2020.

    “I didn’t think those things stood out in the documentary. I thought it was more about Michael trying to uplift himself and to be glorified. I think it also backfired to some degree in that people got a chance to see what kind of personality Michael had,” he explained.

    Pippen, in the same interview, said he confronted Jordan over his feelings about the documentary.

    “I told him I wasn’t too pleased with it. He accepted it. He said, ‘Hey, you’re right.’ That was pretty much it,” Pippen recalled.

    What do you think? Post a comment.
    Other topics Pippen covers in the book include growing up in Arkansas, his college days at UCA, getting drafted in 1987, transparent takes on his former coach Phil Jackson, rival Isiah Thomas, among others, as well as other behind-the-scenes moments from the locker room.

    Scottie Pippen’s “UNGUARDED” memoir will release on November 16, and is available for pre-order now.

  • #2
    https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/...d1bkzh4esdlqn9

    Scottie Pippen slams 'selfish' Michael Jordan, 'racist' Phil Jackson in 'Dan Patrick Show' interview

    Scottie Pippen wasn't known for being a flamethrower on the court, but he certainly knows how to be one off of it.

    In an inflammatory interview on the June 28 edition of "The Dan Patrick Show," Pippen set his sights on former teammate Michael Jordan and head coach Phil Jackson, throwing gasoline on a still-burning fire after the fallout of "The Last Dance."

    Paul and Ayton share their bromance as Suns take 3-1 lead
    Speaking on Jordan's decision to step away from basketball and pursue a baseball career, Pippen called the move "selfish" and said "it was kind of who Michael Jordan was":

    "Yeah It was a big decision, but It was a selfish decision, but it was kind of who Michael Jordan was. That was a guy who believed he can do anything on his own"

    -@ScottiePippen on Michael Jordan's decision to leave the #Bulls and pursue a baseball career pic.twitter.com/PoHFAIjqgc

    — Dan Patrick Show (@dpshow) June 28, 2021
    "That was kind of a guy who believed he could do anything on his own," he said.

    Pippen said while the duo were "excellent teammates" but they were nothing more than that, with no real mention of friendship between the two.

    MORE: Charles Barkley feels 'sadness' about deteriorated friendship with Michael Jordan

    In response to the 2020 docuseries "The Last Dance," which chronicled the 1997-98 Chicago Bulls series, Pippen said the footage was focused on Jordan and not the Bulls at large, with the "cameras" working squarely for Jordan and not for the bulls.

    "All those cameras were working for Michael Jordan not the Chicago Bulls." - Scottie Pippen said that documentary footage was one-sided on @dpshow

    — Andrew Perloff (@andrewperloff) June 28, 2021
    "You know all those cameras who was sitting in that huddle, who they was working for?" Pippen asked. "You know who Michael was speaking to, right? That was planned. That was speaking to the camera. That wasn't speaking out of, what we're gonna have to do, what the play is gonna be. That was speaking to the camera.

    "Had John Stockton not came down — trust me. That was building his own documentary, 'cause he knew he was controlling the cameras."

    Pippen also set his sights on former Bulls head coach Phil Jackson, saying that Jackson didn't afford Pippen the last-second shot in a 1994 playoff matchup vs. the Knicks. Pippen says that Phil Jackson's motivations for giving Kukoc the opportunity at a shot and not himself were purely motivated by race.

    Dan Patrick: "By saying 'racial move' then you're calling Phil Jackson a racist."

    Scottie Pippen: "I don't have a problem with that."

    Patrick: "Do you think Phil was?"

    Pippen: "Oh yeah ..."pic.twitter.com/oKeqVEPuZc

    — Sporting News (@sportingnews) June 28, 2021
    Patrick prodded: "By saying a racial move, you're calling Phil a racist."

    Pippen responds: "I don't have a problem with that."

    Patrick: "Do you think Phil was, or is?"

    Pippen: "Oh, yeah."

    The former Bulls All-Star and Basketball Hall of Famer would also excoriate Jackson for his decision to write a tell-all book about his time with the Lakers and Kobe Bryant. Pippen says that, as a player, he knew Jackson more than people on the outside of the locker room, defending his controversial stance on the head coach.

    Pippen had made recent headlines for comments surrounding Kevin Durant and LeBron James.

    Doesn't look like his propensity to grab headlines is slowing down any time soon.

    I’m just answering the questions y’all asking me. You wanted the headlines, you got them - dig deeper to find out why I actually said what I said instead of framing your questions to get clicks. It’s all love!

    — Scottie Pippen (@ScottiePippen) June 28, 2021
    You can view the entire interview with Pippen on "The Dan Patrick Show" below:

    Comment


    • #3
      The bulls team are overrated, won in a waterdowned years. Who the hell they beat? Never seen a team who won titles that do not like each other. A sad championship team. If winning is everything look at the miserabulls.

      Comment


      • #4
        If the Bulls were overrated then what does that make the Pacers?

        I mean I hate the Bulls(I grew up in Bulls country back then) but you don't need to like each other to win titles the Shaq/Kobe Lakers were proof of that.

        Comment


        • #5
          I looked up at the 80s championship teams. The lakers between kobe and shaq is so obvios and tolerable. But this misserabulls reaally bad. Six championshit and this.

          25 years after and those championship results hatred with each other. Winning is not everythimg.
          Last edited by edc; 06-28-2021, 03:39 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            the real nba championship is the friends we made along the way

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by edc View Post
              The bulls team are overrated, won in a waterdowned years. Who the hell they beat?
              Meth is bad

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by edc View Post
                The bulls team are overrated, won in a waterdowned years. Who the hell they beat?
                Just everyone that they had to play to win the title.

                Comment


                • #9
                  So from what I've read about his criticism of Jackson (outside the drawing up the final shot for Kukoc instead of him), Pippen's really focused on Jackson's representation of Kobe in his book. How doing that is wrong and a breach of trust or whatever. Yet he's now doing the same thing about both Jackson and Jordan. Everybody out for themselves and to make a buck here I guess. I knew Jordan and Jackson were arseholes. Guess I shouldn't be surprised about Pippen, who I consider a great player (even if not Jordan-level greatness). And I think Kukoc was near Pippen's level, although the dominant D was a major differentiator in Pip's favor.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The irony is Phil came back and coached Kobe so clearly whatever issues Kobe had with him ended up being a thing of the past or willing to be set aside for a greater goal. I say this as someone that agrees with Scottie but he shouldn't have brought that up since it didn't involve him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I've always liked Scottie for some reason, even if I felt and acknowledged he had some real tantrums in his playing days. I am not interested in this book. I hate how he's gone on this press tour and just said any crazy bs to get attention. The same reason I haven't tuned into an ESPN or any network sports show in probably 6 or 7 years. Aside from Inside the NBA that is. They have hot takes, but they're also hilarious and hold each other accountable to some extent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I keep telling people in the 90s, the bulls team is not great. Who guarded jograd? The aging lakers, suns majerle, ainge, seattle gary payton, utah bryon russell, shannon anderson, hornacek. All of them are inferior athletically. Only derrick mckey checked jograd thats why the 97-98 pacers almost beat the bulls. Its just jordans time in a watered down league.

                        And if you have a documentary teammates trashing each other after 20++ years its really MISSERABULLS

                        I watch riick carlisle organizing his celtics teammates to pay respect to their coach kc jones. Thats what you call fruits of the championship.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Despise Pippen and have 0 intention of reading any book he puts out... but his defense on Mark Jackson lost us the series in '98.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Have no desire to read his egotistical rants
                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Excerpt of his memoir I honestly forgot all about this until now.

                              https://www.gq.com/story/scottie-pip...d-book-excerpt

                              GQ Sports
                              Scottie Pippen on Michael Jordan in The Last Dance: “He Couldn’t Have Been More Condescending If He Tried”
                              Read an exclusive excerpt from Scottie Pippen's upcoming memoir, Unguarded.
                              BY SCOTTIE PIPPEN

                              November 2, 2021

                              The following is an excerpt from Scottie Pippen's upcoming memoir, Unguarded, out November 9th. Tune in on November 8th at 7pm to watch GQ's Tyler Tynes interview Scottie, where he'll talk about the book, his wild first interview with GQ, and more.
                              May 19, 2020, 6:31 p.m.

                              The text was from Michael. He didn’t reach out very often.

                              What’s up dude? I’m getting word that you’re upset with me. Love to talk about it if you have time.

                              My schedule was packed that evening and I knew the conversation would take a while.

                              I hit him back an hour and a half later:

                              Let’s talk tomorrow.

                              Michael was right. I was upset with him. It was because of The Last Dance, the ten-part ESPN documentary about the Chicago Bulls’ final championship season (1997–98), which millions of people watched during the early weeks of the pandemic.

                              With no live sports on TV, The Last Dance, for five straight Sunday nights starting in mid-April, provided a much-needed distraction from the new normal we suddenly found ourselves in. There was only so much news about hot spots and hospitalizations and deaths anyone could absorb.

                              The final two episodes aired on May 17. Similar to the previous eight, they glorified Michael Jordan while not giving nearly enough praise to me and my proud teammates. Michael deserved a large portion of the blame. The producers had granted him editorial control of the final product. The doc couldn’t have been released otherwise. He was the leading man and the director.

                              I had expected much more. When I was first told about it over a year earlier, I couldn’t wait to tune in, knowing it would feature rare footage.

                              My years in Chicago, beginning as a rookie in the fall of 1987, were the most rewarding of my career: twelve men coming together as one, fulfilling the dreams we had as kids in playgrounds across the land when all we needed was a ball, a basket, and our imagination. To be a member of the Bulls during the 1990s was to be part of something magical. For our times and for all time.

                              Scottie Pippen on Michael Jordan in The Last Dance He Couldnt Have Been More Condescending If He Tried
                              Except Michael was determined to prove to the current generation of fans that he was larger-than-life during his day—and still larger than LeBron James, the player many consider his equal, if not superior. So Michael presented his story, not the story of the “Last Dance,” as our coach, Phil Jackson, billed the 1997–98 season once it became obvious the two Jerrys (owner Jerry Reinsdorf and general manager Jerry Krause) were intent on breaking up the gang no matter what happened.

                              As Krause told Phil in the fall of ’97: You can go 82-0 and it won’t make a difference. This will be your last season as the coach of the Chicago Bulls.

                              ESPN sent me links to the first eight episodes a couple of weeks in advance. As I watched the doc at home in Southern California with my three teenage boys, I couldn’t believe my eyes.

                              Among the scenes in the first episode:

                              Michael, a freshman at the University of North Carolina, hitting the game-winning jump shot against the Georgetown Hoyas in the 1982 NCAA title game.
                              Michael, drafted third by the Bulls in 1984 behind Hakeem Olajuwon (Houston) and Sam Bowie (Portland), talking about his hopes of turning the franchise around.
                              Michael leading the Bulls to a comeback triumph over the Milwaukee Bucks in just his third game.
                              On and on it went, the spotlight shining on number 23.

                              Even in the second episode, which focused for a while on my difficult upbringing and unlikely path to the NBA, the narrative returned to MJ and his determination to win. I was nothing more than a prop. His “best teammate of all time,” he called me. He couldn’t have been more condescending if he tried.

                              On second thought, I could believe my eyes. I spent a lot of time around the man. I knew what made him tick. How na?ve I was to expect anything else.

                              Each episode was the same: Michael on a pedestal, his teammates secondary, smaller, the message no different from when he referred to us back then as his “supporting cast.” From one season to the next, we received little or no credit whenever we won but the bulk of the criticism when we lost. Michael could shoot 6 for 24 from the field, commit 5 turnovers, and he was still, in the minds of the adoring press and public, the Errorless Jordan.

                              Now here I was, in my midfifties, seventeen years since my final game, watching us being demeaned once again. Living through it the first time was insulting enough.

                              Over the next few weeks, I spoke to a number of my former teammates who each felt as disrespected as I did. How dare Michael treat us that way after everything we did for him and his precious brand. Michael Jordan would never have been Michael Jordan without me, Horace Grant, Toni Kukoc, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Dennis Rodman, Bill Cartwright, Ron Harper, B. J. Armstrong, Luc Longley, Will Perdue, and Bill Wennington. I apologize to anyone I’ve left out.

                              I’m not suggesting Michael wouldn’t have been a superstar wherever he ended up. He was that spectacular. Just that he relied on the success we attained as a team—six titles in eight years—to propel him to a level of fame throughout the world no other athlete, except for Muhammad Ali, has reached in modern times.

                              To make things worse, Michael received $10 million for his role in the doc while my teammates and I didn’t earn a dime, another reminder of the pecking order from the old days. For an entire season, we allowed cameras into the sanctity of our locker rooms, our practices, our hotels, our huddles…our lives.



                              Michael wasn’t the only former teammate to reach out that week. Two days later, I received a text from John Paxson, the starting point guard from our first two championships, who later became the Bulls’ general manager and then vice president of basketball operations. I heard from Paxson less often than from Michael.

                              Hey, Pip…its Pax.

                              Michael Reinsdorf [Jerry’s son, who runs the franchise] gave me your number. Just want you to know I respected everything about you as a teammate. ****ing narratives can be told but I rely on my real experiences. Watched you grow from a rook…to a pro. Dont let others, including the media, define you. You are successful and valued and I have always felt lucky to be your teammate.

                              Was receiving texts from Michael and Paxson only two days apart a coincidence? I think not.

                              Both were aware of how angry I was about the doc. They were checking in to make sure I wouldn’t cause any trouble: to the Bulls, who still paid Paxson as an adviser; or to Michael’s legacy, always a major concern.

                              Paxson and I hadn’t gotten along in years. In the summer of 2003, I turned down an offer from the Memphis Grizzlies to sign a two-year contract with the Bulls, where I would be a mentor to young players such as Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Jamal Crawford, and Kirk Hinrich, while working closely with the coach, Bill Cartwright. I played with Bill from 1988 through 1994. We used to call him Teach. He didn’t say much. When he did say something, he made you think.

                              “Pip, I want you to help Bill out,” Paxson said, “to sort of be a coach from the sidelines.”

                              Why not? A new challenge was exactly what I needed. At thirty-eight, my career was winding down. There was a lot I could offer, on and off the court, and I felt confident the experience would pave the way for me to be a coach myself one day, perhaps with the Bulls.

                              It didn’t quite work out that way. Bill was fired after 14 games, replaced by Scott Skiles.

                              I played in only 23 games before retiring in October of 2004. My body was shot after seventeen years in the league—more like nineteen and a half years, if you count the 208 playoff games. Paxson felt I had let him, and the franchise, down. Which might explain why, after my career was over, he didn’t seek my opinion about personnel matters even though he knew how much I wanted to have a say in the team’s future.

                              In 2010, when I was finally put on the Bulls’ payroll, I was nothing more than a mascot, trotted out a few times every year for “appearances.” I signed autographs and met with season-ticket holders, hired for mainly one purpose, to serve as a link to the glory days.

                              At last, in early 2014, it appeared I would play a more meaningful role. The Bulls sent me to about a dozen college games to do some scouting. One of the trips was to Cameron Indoor Stadium in Durham, North Carolina, to see No. 5 Duke host No. 1 Syracuse. I had watched many Duke games on TV. What a scene it was: the students, their faces painted in blue, standing up the whole game to root for their beloved Blue Devils and rattle their poor opponents.


                              Duke, led by freshman forward Jabari Parker, defeated Syracuse, 66–60.

                              I couldn’t believe how loud it was. Louder even than Chicago Stadium, where we played for many years. I was excited to be involved with the basketball operations. For the Bulls to benefit from my expertise instead of exploiting my name.

                              After filing the scouting reports, I waited to hear back from Paxson and other members of the organization. What would they want me to do next?

                              I didn’t hear a word.

                              Nor did the Bulls invite me to any meetings or workouts with prospects in the weeks leading up to the 2014 NBA draft. It dawned on me they’d been humoring me from the start.

                              On May 22, 2020, the day after Paxson sent his text, the two of us spoke for a few minutes over the phone. He got right to the point:

                              “Pip, I hated how things turned out when you came back to Chicago. This organization has always treated you poorly, and I want you to know that I think it’s not right.”

                              I was glad to hear Paxson admit a wrong I had known forever. Which didn’t mean I was willing to forgive him. If that, indeed, was what he was looking for. It was too late for that.

                              “John,” I said, “that is all fine and dandy, but you worked in the front office for the Bulls for almost twenty years. You had a chance to change that and you didn’t.”

                              He began to cry. Not knowing how to respond, I waited for him to stop. Why he was crying, I couldn’t be sure, and honestly, I didn’t care.

                              Before long, our chat was, mercifully, over.

                              Excerpted from Unguarded by Scottie Pippen. Copyright ? 2021 by Scottie Pippen. Excerpted by permission of Atria Books, a division of Simon & Schuster.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X