Tweet
JJ Redick is destroying this "old school" clowns left and right 
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.
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
-
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
-
I hope this isn't true.
Myles Turner Likely To Stay With Pacers - RealGM Wiretap
Myles Turner Likely To Stay With Pacers
The Indiana Pacers started the rebuilding process at last season's trade deadline. The Pacers traded away Domantas Sabonis and broke up the pairing of he and Myles Turner.
Now, Indiana is likely to keep Turner, as they look to get back into playoff contention this year. Turner has one season left on his contract at $18 million. He's been continually in trade rumors, but it seems as if the Pacers intend to keep him. Turner is seen as a good fit with Tyrese Haliburton, who Indiana acquired in the Sabonis trade.
Turner is coming off back-to-back injury-plagued seasons, but he remains productive when available. He's one of the NBA's best shot-blockers and help defenders. Turner also has good shooting range for a big, which makes him playable in many lineups, including next to other big men.
MARC STEIN/SUBSTACK
Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.Comment
-
Dear KP
It's been 7 years....let this man go. You clearly aren't getting anything for him. We need some Jalen Duren in our lives. Do what you gotta do to get him here please.
Comment
-
All I know is that I won't be watching again if they keep forcing Softner on us.
Enough is enough you already tried this bs for 8 years now.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
-
I didn't watch until Softner was injured and out for the seasonOriginally posted by kent beckley View Post
Unless they get Ivey I'm not watching s*** with Softner in there.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
a raw, undersized center who didn't take a 3 all year? like i said the other day, "bargain bin dale davis" isn't cutting it in today's nba...we just got rid of domas...now we want to get a version of domas without the playmaking? i liked 90s nba, but it's different league nowOriginally posted by CJ Jones View PostComment
-
box score readerOriginally posted by vnzla81 View Post
I didn't watch until Softner was injured and out for the seasonComment
-
Bargain bin?!!? Nah this guy's Dale Davis on 'roids. I was hoping Looney and Williams' success in the playoffs would kill the narrative about modern bigs on this board but I guess not.Originally posted by dal9 View PostComment
-
Blasphemy! The definition of DD is precisely Dale Davis on 'roids. There is no level of DD beyond DD. No offense to Duren. If he, in fact, turns out to be more of a bad-*** enforcer, tough guy, then I'll gladly accept that or other terminology to describe him. But he's got to earn that mantle first.Originally posted by CJ Jones View PostI'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
https://www.nba.com/news/qa-grant-hi...-autobiography
Q&A: Grant Hill reflects on legendary career in new autobiography
The 2018 Hall of Fame inductee has continued to shine since retirement.
Learn more about the life and career of Hall of Famer Grant Hill.
As much as anyone perhaps could, Grant Hill has led what looks like a charmed life while having a star-crossed NBA career.
A two-time NCAA champion at Duke, an Olympic gold medalist and a seven-time NBA All-Star was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2018. As the No. 3 pick by Detroit in the 1994 Draft, Hill earned co-Rookie of the Year honors with Dallas’ Jason Kidd and still was active 18 years later, playing his final games at age 40.
But the prime of his playing days got derailed by injuries, misdiagnoses and re-injuries of his left ankle. The versatile 6-foot-8 wing lost essentially four seasons to the ankle and setback, clipping short his greatness with the Pistons and limiting him to 200 games across seven years with the Orlando Magic.
Hill, after averaging 20.2 points, 9.8 rebounds and 6.9 assists in his second season, looked destined to beat Russell Westbrook to Oscar Robertson’s famous triple-double season. He averaged 21.6 points, 7.9 rebounds and 6.3 assists with Detroit, beating out Michael Jordan in All-Star vote totals at one point and whetting the NBA’s appetite for a superstar and marketing replacement for the Bulls’ legend.
After his injuries, returning at 32 after missing the entire 2003-04 season, Hill was more of a role player with the Magic, the Phoenix Suns (2007-2012) and the LA Clippers (2012-13). His stats: 13.1, 4.7 and 2.6.
See who Grant Hill was able to put on a poster with some of his best poster jams.
In his memoir “Game” released Tuesday, Hill takes readers through his highs and lows as a player, from some of hoops’ most exhilarating moments to dark, lonely withdrawals into what seemed like endless injury rehab.
He shares stories about his childhood with high-achieving parents, his marriage to Canadian-born, seven-time Grammy nominee Tamia, and his role with the hastily assembled college squad that beat the 1992 “Dream Team” in their first scrimmage. Hill also reveals the drive that has made him successful wearing so many post-playing hats, from the financial and real-estate arenas and his broadcast work with Turner Sports to his new role as managing director of the USA Basketball men’s program and as a minority owner of the Atlanta Hawks.
Hill also delves into his brushes with hip-hop artists, issues of social importance and his appreciation of black art. This summer, to push himself as an on-the-air analyst, Hill plans to pick the brain of the NFL color commentator Cris Collinsworth.
During the first leg of the 2022 NBA Finals in San Francisco, Hill spoke with NBA.com’s Steve Aschburner about his new book and assorted other topics:
Editor’s Note: The following 1-on-1 conversation has been condensed and edited.
NBA.com: Did you worry about the prospect of bruising some feelings with the candor with which you approached the book, whether it was Christian Laettner, Doug Collins, Mike (Coach K) Krzyzewski or anyone else in there?
Grant Hill: It was more about me than exposing everyone else or having an axe to grind with others. I think you can naturally come to your conclusions on certain things, like injuries and how that was maybe mismanaged a bit. But it was really more about my experience and what I was going through, my perspective from very young to going into the Hall of Fame.
You were an only child raised in Reston, Va., by extremely successful and busy parents. Your father Calvin went to Yale and was a four-time NFL Pro Bowl running back best known for his Dallas Cowboys years. Your mother Janet was an attorney and consultant in Washington, D.C., who ran the household and became known to you and your friends as “The General.” How did growing up without brothers or sisters shape your personality?
I’m an only child of two only children. So being comfortable being alone is a big part, because a lot of your life you are alone. I wonder about nature and nurture and having a desire to fit in and not stand out. That was something I struggled with during my formative years.
There was a shy, insecure, kind of introverted side of me. A lot of my early memories of basketball were just going outside and dribbling. We didn’t have a basketball hoop at home and our driveway was on a slope, so it wouldn’t have worked.
Here’s an only-child story. I had to be maybe 10, and my dad took me to New Haven (Conn.) to go to the Yale-Harvard football game. And my mom’s business partner, Clifford Alexander, his kids were students at Yale. So we went to their dorm and in the common area, my dad was holding court, talking, answering questions.
I went outside to a courtyard where there were two lampposts. I had no ball. No baskets. But I literally was out there “playing basketball” with my imagination. I’m pretending, making moves, dribbling, in my mind. Finally I went in and I was drenched with sweat.
Either that’s weird or that’s a product of being an only child. I played a basketball game with no basket, basketball or other players.
You became a big fan of John Thompson’s Georgetown Hoyas and write about your dad taking you to the Final Four in 1984 in Seattle. That was special, with multiple future NBA stars like Patrick Ewing, Hakeem Olajuwon and a loaded Kentucky team there.
I was 11 and that’s when I was falling in love with basketball. I didn’t really fall in love with it through the NBA, it was college basketball. We see the NBA everywhere now, but it didn’t have that kind of presence in the early ‘80s.
Grant Hill delivers an emotional essay to honor the late John Thompson.
Really, for me, it was the ’82 Final Four with Georgetown and going to that Final Four in ’84. I remember thinking, there’s no way Georgetown can beat Kentucky with Mel Turpin and Kenny Walker, Sam Bowie. James Blackmon was a freshman, Winston Bennett. But Kentucky couldn’t make a shot in the second half [3-for-33].
So why now for the book?
People had mentioned it at different times before since I retired. I did have an idea while I was playing to do a 2010 version of Bill Bradley’s “Life on the Run.” I remembered reading that back in college. I was in Phoenix, kind of in a good place, and there was a great spirit with that team.
So in the summer of 2009, I was going to do it. I was going to keep a journal of the season and kind of dive into some of the players on the team and their stories. I was talking to Commissioner [David] Stern on something else and brought up the idea. He said, “I love it, but don’t do it. It will be a job. It’s tough enough playing and getting through a season without having to meet deadlines. It would be just another burden.” He kind of scared me.
Then we had a magical season that year. We lost to Kobe [Bryant] and the Lakers in the Western Conference finals. I was like, “Man, I should have done it.”
What sparked this book was the Hall of Fame. The announcement and then the lead-up to the enshrinement, I think you just naturally reflect. You’re appreciative, you’re grateful. I got a little mad because of the injury stuff. But what I realized was, I never really had looked back on my career. A book forces you to relive certain moments of your life and find the lessons. Try to understand what you were feeling, what you were thinking. I’m not the same person I was five years ago. Definitely not the same person I was 30 years ago. That whole exercise was really good in some ways, and in some ways, it was really tough.
The recall you display had me wondering if you kept a journal throughout your career.
It’s interesting what you remember and what you don’t. I could have done a book just on my first year at Duke — I remember everything vividly. And then I remember the injury stuff. Details, conversations, the emotions. All of that, it was easy to recall.
I didn’t remember a lot of the Detroit stuff. That was interesting. For me, the goal always was to win. At Duke, we always had a chance. In Detroit, we didn’t come close to winning. I had great individual success on and off the court, but I wasn’t happy with the outcomes. So I didn’t celebrate those accomplishments. I didn’t appreciate those accomplishments because they didn’t contribute to winning.
Those were the best seasons of your professional career, five All-Star selections in six seasons.
You know how they say you should stop and smell the roses and enjoy life? I didn’t enjoy those years, but when I looked back, I was like, “Wow, those were really special.” I also didn’t feel the disappointment, the injuries. I remember staying focused and suppressing a lot of that. But that re-surfaced leading up to enshrinement and in the process of writing the book.
Heck, just writing the acceptance speech would seem daunting enough. At least it forces you to take inventory of what you’ve done and gone through.
Plus they told us we could only go five minutes, and I went first. We had a big class [2018] and they told me, “You’re going to set the tone.” So I was exactly seven minutes.
Grant Hill talks with Celtics All-Star Jayson Tatum at the 2022 NBA Finals.
Did reaching the Hall of Fame soothe all the injury frustrations, sort of “I made it anyway?”
What it made me think was, “I made it to the Hall of Fame and I was incomplete.” I had four good years in college and six good years in the NBA. I didn’t see this all the way through. I got mad. I used to tell myself I didn’t need the Hall of Fame, because to me overcoming my injuries and coming back to play nine more years was more fulfilling and rewarding. But then when it became real and got close to enshrinement, I got a little … bitter. I unpacked that even more when writing the book.
So the “what ifs” hit even harder than before?
With the book, going into greater detail, I was like, “Man, I was on a certain trajectory and the injury situation cut that short.” I came back, but I wasn’t the same. I was older. And when you miss four years …
Every great one has this athletic arrogance where, every time you step on the floor, you feel you’re the best player. If I went against Michael Jordan or whomever, I felt like “You’ve got to deal with me.” When I returned from the injuries, I was just happy to be back. That’s a great attitude to have, but you kind of lose that edge.
Golden State’s Klay Thompson has sounded like that recently, eager to enjoy being back while still not looking quite like his pre-injuries self.
I told Derrick Rose that when he was coming back. I think I even told Klay that. You put together consecutive days, weeks, months of hell. The basketball part will come. So don’t get frustrated when you’re not where you want to be. But also don’t be satisfied – commit to getting better. Go watch tape of yourself – you have to remind yourself who you were.
People remember those good years I had. But I remember the disappointment. Having to fight to get back. Being old and having to guard Kobe at 37. I don’t remember the Detroit stuff.
I won’t say it’s a regret. It’s great to have perspective. And physically, there were certain things I just couldn’t do anymore. I couldn’t train and prepare myself to be great. In the summers, once I came back from the ankle, I didn’t touch a ball. The trainers in Phoenix would say, “Get away from it.” So I would give myself six or eight weeks to ramp up and hopefully be at my best opening night. But I didn’t touch a basketball at all.
To me, the grind of putting the work in and getting better in the offseason, that’s part of being elite. The last time I did that was 1999. After that, I couldn’t do it. I was just trying to get healthy. If I got through a year, I was going to rest, I was going to be smart. I’d stay in shape, but I wasn’t touching a basketball.
Totally from the outside looking in, I recall thinking when you left Orlando and signed with Phoenix in 2007, “It’s too bad he didn’t re-up with the Magic. They had paid him all that money when he couldn’t play. Now that he can…” Admittedly, I wasn’t privy to the inner workings and your relationship with the team.
I felt like I was inclined to stay. I also was looking at going back to Detroit. But I concluded I didn’t want to ruin what I’d done there.
The surgeries and some of the issues were there, but there also were a couple times when [Orlando] wanted to buy me out and move me up to the front office. When I didn’t play, the insurance paid my salary – that was no longer an expense they had. And I think it kind of exhausted everybody, which I get. You could feel that.
Check out the Top 10 Poster Jams from Grant Hill's NBA career.
I saw that more recently in Chicago with Rose. They needed to go their separate ways.
The one person who wanted me to stay that summer was [coach] Stan Van Gundy. I remember going in mid-June and he was like, “I want to put the ball back into your hands, I want you to run the screen-and-roll, I want it to be like it was in Detroit, I want you to shoot threes,” yada yada yada. He was a big fan. I thought, “This is actually kind of cool.”
But free agency comes, I don’t hear from the team for a week. The only [time we talked] was when I called and told them I was going to Phoenix.
Looking back at it, it was time. And when they made a run in 2009, I was happy for those guys. Then there was a Sports Illustrated article where Otis [Smith, Orlando’s former GM] said “We needed Grant to leave because we needed Jameer [Nelson] and Dwight [Howard] to grow. They were always going to defer to Grant.”
I remember reading that and thought “Validation!” Because everyone thought I’d left them high and dry, but I could sense that it was time.
The fans in Orlando didn’t pick up on that, though.
I didn’t have any hard feelings, but when I went with Phoenix to play there, every time I had the ball in the layup line, the fans booed me. It was hilarious. My teammates started throwing me the ball even in the rebounding line.
Look, the guys on that team, I was happy for them, that they had a nice run. I was happy for Detroit when they won [in 2004, after Hill left in 2000]. I hadn’t played with any of those guys other than Lindsey [Hunter]. But Phoenix was good for me. It was good to end it in a good environment and being healthy.
There’s a saying, “Begin with the end in mind.” You seemed to be quite aware of the end of your playing career even as it was beginning.
By the time I was in Phoenix, I already established a real estate business. I started a mezzanine [capital] fund, so I was dabbling a little in finance. But I was thinking that from Day 1. Maybe that was from seeing my dad and his generation go through that transition of life after sports. Some do very well – [Cowboys Hall of Fame QB] Roger Staubach – while others struggle. So I was always conscious of that and maybe slightly paranoid.
I don’t believe that things just happen. I believe you need to be very intentional, and the idea of ownership, I’d been thinking that since my second or third year in the NBA.
Each place, with the exception of the Clippers, I got to know the owners well. And sort of what made them tick. How and why they were successful. Learning about them and their stories. [Robert] Sarver in Phoenix. The DeVos family in Orlando. Mr. [Bill] Davidson in Detroit. I didn’t know when it would happen, but it wasn’t like I woke up two years after retirement and discovered, oh, wow, this ownership opportunity is there.
I also would go to the Duke alumni association and get the names of distinguished Duke alums in various cities. I’d meet with them, building up the Rolodex just to learn. You come to San Francisco, you reach out to somebody, “Hey, you want to have coffee?” Nine times out of 10, they’re going to come over to the hotel and they’re going to pay for it. Successful people, I think, enjoy talking about themselves [laughing].
Your group with Tony Ressler and the others bid $1.2 billion for the Clippers franchise but Steve Ballmer blew you out of the water at $2 billion. The Atlanta deal worked out, however, a tribute to your networking while playing.
There’s tremendous visibility being associated with this league. And being able to leverage that is something I learned very early. I thought, let me gain access while I can. Because at some point, people aren’t going to care who you are.
I still have somewhere at home the April 1995 issue of GQ, with you on the cover touting a story, “Can Grant Hill Save Sports?” It seems a little outlandish to put that on an NBA rookie. But you did arrive when Michael Jordan was gone (the first time) and there was desperation in this league for “Who’s next?”
I thought it was silly. And I felt it right away as a rookie that there was a void. There was pressure. I didn’t try to embrace it. And I didn’t feel like I was deserving of that yet. But I probably exploited it and leveraged it. When Sprite and McDonald’s and Fila and General Motors came knocking, I didn’t say, “No, I’m not ready.”
Being thrust into that … part of my Duke years was getting to a point where I was comfortable standing out. I think in my younger years, I was trying to fit in. That senior year prepared me for that experience. Stepping into your greatness, that’s where I needed a little push.
I got better in my six years in Detroit. In my first year, I was good, but I don’t think I was ready to be that guy.
Your fellow Duke alum Quin Snyder, late of the Utah Jazz, gave you advice as you hit the NBA about not turning your back to advance the ball in the frontcourt. He told you to face up and challenges defenders with your pace and moves, heading downhill.
In pickup ball I played that way. In the summers, I used to try to be like Chris Jackson, Tim Hardaway, coming at you. But in the games, you didn’t see big guys doing that. Magic, Paul Pressey, Steve Smith, Jalen Rose at Michigan – they played [with back turned].
What I realized was that small forwards weren’t used to guarding somebody who was coming at them. Now a lot of people are doing that. After 20 games, I’m calling my buddies, saying “This league is easy.” Till they get a scouting report it’s easy.
As a broadcaster, being around the Finals, how can you relate the experience to where you want the Hawks to get one day, chasing a title?
It’s inspiring. We were close last year. A little step back this year. But to be able to be in this environment and as media members preparing to cover, you start to uncover things about the teams, about the organizations. We read stories, we hob-knob, we share and exchange things, and if you can take away some institutional knowledge and go back and share it with your group, that’s great.
It’s a long season. I think we’re all kind of exhausted when we get to this point. But it rejuvenates you, too, to be here. As a former player, it’s tough because you never had a chance to play in this environment. But as a partner in the league, I saw the ratings – the ratings are back to 2019 levels.
I hope to one day be here with Joe Lacob, Peter Guber … [Milwaukee’s] Marc Lasry last year, where you’re on the sideline cheering as opposed to working.Comment
-
100 million more to Myles sounds not great...
I'm going to be venturing into vnzla-levels of hate if that happens.Comment
-
Comment