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

Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

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

  • #46
    Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

    Originally posted by ABADays View Post
    Now wait a minute. Although there may not have been a direct quote JO hinted many times about a "whatever the best thing is". He cartainly was never adamant about wanting to stay and get this thing turned around.

    This year's team is one I truly believe where Foster can be a leader simply because of his tenure. I find it interesting that you mentioned his lack of appreciable talent other than hustle but I bet there are a dozen teams that would like to have that on their team.
    JO could've used some of that Foster 'hustle'.

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

      wait...what? i'm really confused. hasn't jermaine already said he didn't want to be here the last two years? repeatedly? why is this an issue?

      EDIT: and to echo others, who the hell wanted to be on this team (other than courtney sims)? JO wanted out. Tinsley wants out. Stan VanJeremy didn't want to coach the team. It didn't seem like Jimmy wanted to be there most nights.

      but this is a new era for the pacers. things change. let's please move on.
      Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 08-27-2008, 05:59 PM.
      This is the darkest timeline.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

        Originally posted by ABADays View Post
        I find it interesting that you mentioned his lack of appreciable talent other than hustle but I bet there are a dozen teams that would like to have that on their team.
        And 18 teams where he couldn't even crack the rotation.

        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

          Let it out Jeff Foster!

          To equate how JO felt about being a Pacer to how others felt is wrong on multiple levels.

          First, it disregards the fact that JO was the player who had major issues with Bird. That's probably what Foster meant but did not spell out for the world. It also disregards that some of these guys were getting their first big chance (e.g. Diener who was undoubtedly happier not riding the bench). It totally ignores the fact that Dunleavy's career has been resurrected in Indy and probably the happiest year of his career being out of Golden State and performing like an all-star. I did not see Granger crying either as he set up for an 8 figure per year salary. No question his opportunities and performance has improved since happy Jack and Al left. Now Danny cashes in.

          I suspect people are confusing how the fans might have felt the past two years...making the assumption the players felt the same way.

          The truth is, JO was not happy the last two years because he did not like playing for Bird and struggled with injuries. The fact he's overpaid and a below average franchise player even when healthy is probably something he doesn't know that would make it even worse for him...so on that point he's fortunate.

          Edit: BTW, there has been so much turnover on the team there's few people on the club who even have a memory of the "good times". Many didn't even experience the "bad times". One thing I will give JO is that he kept his level of disgruntled-ness quiet. Gotta respect that...
          Last edited by BlueNGold; 08-27-2008, 07:09 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
            And 18 teams where he couldn't even crack the rotation.

            i don't buy that the no one wanted to be on the pacers last year. Under RC definitely, but O'brien no. Other than JO and Tinsley (who radiates sunshine) i think last year's team could have developed chemistry. However, the fans were alredy gone and they weren't coming back with JO and Tinsley taking paid leaves of absence.

            I believe that with JO and Tinsley gone there is a chance to build some team spirit. We will know soon enough if fans return that the team is working.When it is worth $20 M to have a player not show up you know he is a big part of the problem.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

              i'm also highly disappointed no one has posted this picture yet



              shame on you. SHAME ON YOU PD!

              found via IndyCornrows
              This is the darkest timeline.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                That's the craziest thing I've ever read.

                We're criticizing Jermaine for not demanding a trade? Really?

                We're wishing that he'd done more griping to the media?
                Absolutely!

                If he didn't want to be a Pacer, he should have let the FO know he wanted to be traded. If you work in a part of a company and don't like it there and want to be transferred out, do you just say nothing in hopes you'll be transfered out, or do you tell TPTB you want to be transfered? In JO's case traded.

                I don't know about you, but I let it be known I wanted to be elsewhere with a company I was with. After expressing my desire many times, I finally got my wish and was transfered to another division where I had a very successful career. If I hadn't, I'd have stayed a mgr forever. Voicing my desire got me where I wanted to go, and opened up a whole new world for me.

                You might want to re-read my post. I never mentioned the words griping or media. You did! Please, don't attribute things to my post I never said, I would truly appreciate it. If you so chose to disagree with what I have posted, which you frequently do, please feel free to do so, but not things I didn't post. I always look forward to reading your comments about my posts even if 90% of them are in disagreement, but thank you for reading them.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  You might want to re-read my post. I never mentioned the words griping or media. You did! Please, don't attribute things to my post I never said, I would truly appreciate it. If you so chose to disagree with what I have posted, which you frequently do, please feel free to do so, but not things I didn't post. I always look forward to reading your comments about my posts even if 90% of them are in disagreement, but thank you for reading them.
                  I certainly don't want to mis-attribute. Let me show you what I responded to, and you can tell me how I should have responded to it.

                  You said:

                  Originally posted by Justin
                  DW accommodated other players who wanted to be traded in the past... DD, AD, Big Al; so if JO was unhappy he could have asked/demanded a trade.
                  All of these guys (except JO) publicly demanded a trade by griping to the media. AD did the least, although it was clear to the public that he was unhappy. Al was pretty blatant in his displeasure, as was Dale.

                  So when you say "If Jermaine wanted out he should have demanded a trade like Dale" I read that as "publicly demanded." We all know that Jermaine said publicly he wouldn't mind being traded, and we all assumed (especially last year) that he'd rather be traded. But it's bad form to publicly demand a trade, and I'm glad Jermaine never did that. I'll never complain about somebody not going public with a trade demand.

                  If you're saying he never privately asked to be traded, I'd say you're assuming an awful lot. We don't know that he never asked to be traded. In fact, I think it's pretty reasonable to think that he DID ask to be traded, given his "I wouldn't complain if they traded me" public persona.

                  =====

                  So when I say this:

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  That's the craziest thing I've ever read.

                  We're criticizing Jermaine for not demanding a trade? Really?

                  We're wishing that he'd done more griping to the media?
                  and you say this:
                  Originally posted by Justin
                  Absolutely!

                  If he didn't want to be a Pacer, he should have let the FO know he wanted to be traded. If you work in a part of a company and don't like it there and want to be transferred out, do you just say nothing in hopes you'll be transfered out, or do you tell TPTB you want to be transfered? In JO's case traded.

                  I don't know about you, but I let it be known I wanted to be elsewhere with a company I was with. After expressing my desire many times, I finally got my wish and was transfered to another division where I had a very successful career. If I hadn't, I'd have stayed a mgr forever. Voicing my desire got me where I wanted to go, and opened up a whole new world for me.
                  It makes me think I did read your post correctly and understand you.

                  So what did I miss?
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                    So our new leader is making excuses for last season by blaming on a player who played in half the games. Awesome!! I hope this is contagious. I bet if JO really wanted to be here Jeff could make a put back as well.
                    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                      The thing is, JO has wanted out for years. He hadn't been happy since Zeke got the boot and had enough sense to realize that if he came out and demanded a trade, he would diminish his trade value making it less likely the Pacers would have dealt him. Sure, it took a few seasons because Walsh and Bird didn't want to be known as the management who gave up on a promising younger low post player who showed flashes of becoming an MVP at one point. And yes, a lot of front office staffers throughout the league knew he wanted out too, but JO's management team and Arn Tellem were calling the shots on what to say publicly.

                      Look at guys like Ron Artest who came out and demanded to be traded and we got a 4 month rental of Peja and were only bailed out by the Simons and their relationship with George Shinn.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                        Carlisle and Al didn't get along? I could understand why after we were 8 games into the season and JO made it be known he wanted to be used differently... which affected Al... But I've not heard it actually said Carlisle and Al didn't get along.
                        At PD parties this has been discussed and I think there are some who feel that even if they didn't really like Jackson that there might be some truth to the following...HARRINGTON was a bigger reason the GSW trade went down than Jack.

                        Why? Well about 10 days prior to the GSW trade things had gone so sour between Rick and Al that Rick benched him for the start of the 2nd half and I'm not sure he even played at all the rest of that game. I can't recall which game that was, but it was noted at the time. It wasn't an injury.

                        Think about just how bad Al had to carp to get benched to start the half. Rick put up with a lot of crap from Ron, JO, Tins, and Jackson, especially if some of the behind the scenes rumors are true, and was still willing to stick it out with them.

                        Meanwhile as Gnome has verified since he was sitting next to me at the time (and as I've posted many times), when GSW returned to play the Pacers and Jack went off for big numbers, the post game featured Jack not just lingering over to Rick, but going out of his way to find Rick and give him a full, extended hug. It was like son/father caliber.

                        That made it clear that while Jack lost his cool in the moment his overall interaction with Rick had left them with a friendship. Meanwhile Harrington couldn't get off the court quick enough.

                        Some stories aren't that hard to figure out. The Pacers went well out of their way to get Al back and then gave up in half a season. Heck, they put up with a shooting and half a season of very directed booing toward Jackson before finally trading him. Actions speak louder than words - Al was a pain in the rear.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                          Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                          i'm also highly disappointed no one has posted this picture yet



                          shame on you. SHAME ON YOU PD!

                          found via IndyCornrows
                          Shade was in the ABA? Solid snail trail.
                          Read my Pacers blog:
                          8points9seconds.com

                          Follow my twitter:

                          @8pts9secs

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            Yes, I do. In fact, I've been conscious from time to time of looking for you around there, though I know you don't make a regular summertime habit of checking out the practice court. I know what you look like from the forum party photos, so I could spot you first and assume a defensive posture.
                            I have more regular hours job now and not downtown anymore either. Too bad because I used to be able to swing by lunch if I thought something might be up or wanted to get a ticket last second.

                            Still I need to take the bike over after work or on the weekend and see what's up. It's cool when you do catch guys on the court working out. Just makes them feel more connected to the city IMO.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              Why? Well about 10 days prior to the GSW trade things had gone so sour between Rick and Al that Rick benched him for the start of the 2nd half and I'm not sure he even played at all the rest of that game. I can't recall which game that was, but it was noted at the time. It wasn't an injury.
                              Actually, it was the MLK Day beating against NJ (final score wasn't that bad if I recall correctly, but the game was a horrible, horrible game).

                              The game was on a Monday afternoon, and by Wednesday morning Harrington was a Golden State Warrior, so it all happened pretty quickly. Judging by the benching and the way Al played carelessly when he was re-inserted in the third quarter, it seemed clear to me that Al's days were numbered at that point. It was never 'get Stephen Jackson out of town' trade. To me, it was a 'let's trade the malcontents', as that's basically what happened. Saras, Stephen, and Al all complained about Rick after the trade.


                              Putnam, thanks for the update. Would you (or anyone else) be willing to take pictures next time you're in that area? I miss Conseco.


                              Also, I think people need to give Jeff a little more credit, especially with his words.

                              How often has Jeff spoken like this to the media? From all accounts, Jeff is also one of the ultimate professionals in the league. If anything, these two factors should accentuate the truth, criticism, AND his singling out of Jermaine.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                                Since Foster has no appreciable talent other than hustle, we can all see for ourselves that he still hustled during the games. We don't know how he practiced or carried himself off the court. I'm not trying to pick on Foster here, I'm just saying that he could have named about a dozen players that didn't want to be here. What is the upside in calling out JO in any way?

                                The "I hate the team I love" side of me wants to see JO drop 40 on Foster during his first return to the Fieldhouse.

                                Jeff was just being honest and sure perhaps he could have named a dozen other players, but JO was the Pacers most important player who is now gone - so that is why Jeff made those comments.

                                I wouldn't worry about JO dropping 40 on Foster - because jeff always guards the better offensive player - meaning he'll be guarding Bosh. (but I'm sure Jeff could defend JO rather well one-on-one.


                                You know I wasn't going to let your statement - Since Foster has no appreciable talent other than hustle go by without a comment. I suppose we could argue what is a talent and what isn't. But he has extremely quick feet for a guy his size, very quick hands, overall he is quick and and pretty fast, has an uncanny ability to track down the ball. Not sure if you would classify those as talents - but they are assets for sure

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X