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

Bird Needs To Go!

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

  • #61
    Re: Bird Needs To Go!

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    I think the Pacers talent right now and that is without Granger is the worst in the entire NBA


    I couldn't agree more! I was trying to think of another team last night with worst talent, and I really couldn't. Even the Nets have Lopez, Harris, Lee, CD-R, and T'Will with a great prospect of being able to get Wall in the draft.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Bird Needs To Go!

      Originally posted by IndyHoosier View Post
      They still suck, as do the Pacers! They are 2 & 28 for gods sake!

      Being 2-28 doesn't change the fact they overall have better players. 3 out of 4 of their core players are only in their 2nd season, and are better than the Pacers last 2 years draft picks. That alone shows how terrible the talent on the Pacers is, and the person who drafted them lack of expertise in knowing talent.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Bird Needs To Go!

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        Is staying the course with Bird and failure the answer? I surely hope not.
        i totally agree with justin tyme.... Bird does not know talent.. why are we paying foster to play for us? he provides 0 offense and is hurting us more than his little rebounding.... why do we have travis on this team? why does not mcroberts play more? this team has talent? LOL this team has only a few players with talent..this team plays absolutely no defense and with the players we have defense isnt coming anytime soon..i have stated this before and will again... id rather have more athletic players than some we have on this team..this team isnt even trying to better this team... look at atlanta a few years ago.....they traded and got better...... the kings are improving,houston wins without YAO..... its time people stop quoting we need to know what we have before we make trades this team isnt healthy . thats what kevin lee said... if Bird does not know what we have now only because granger and foster are hurt this says alot about the management... im tired of excuses these are pros not high school players.... its time to start playing with heart and soul or clean this team out.. i dont care if it starts with granger....

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Bird Needs To Go!

          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
          Devin Harris is better than Granger.
          What the

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Bird Needs To Go!

            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

            Of course, some of those players were late draft picks which are usually crapshots anyways. We got lucky with Granger at the 17th pick. Right now, we're starting to get lucky again with Rush, Hibbert, and Hansbrough at a time when it matters.

            Getting those 3 players is being lucky? If that's your definition of being lucky, I'll pass. Those are rotational players at best. You need to go back and look at the the last 4 drafts and see the talent that got away b/c of poor drafting by Bird. Only one person is responsible for those poor drafts and his name is BIRD.

            I believe some has misunderstood that this thread is not advocating Bird being fired, but just not giving him another contract to continue to make poor managerial decisions for the future. Many posters feel JOB was brought in as a temporary coach to fill a need and then be replaced with a coach who can take the team to the next level. I feel the same about Bird. He's changed the culture of the team from 3 years ago, and it's time for someone else to lead this franchise to the next level.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Bird Needs To Go!

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              Getting those 3 players is being lucky? If that's your definition of being lucky, I'll pass. Those are rotational players at best. You need to go back and look at the the last 4 drafts and see the talent that got away b/c of poor drafting by Bird. Only one person is responsible for those poor drafts and his name is BIRD.

              I believe some has misunderstood that this thread is not advocating Bird being fired, but just not giving him another contract to continue to make poor managerial decisions for the future. Many posters feel JOB was brought in as a temporary coach to fill a need and then be replaced with a coach who can take the team to the next level. I feel the same about Bird. He's changed the culture of the team from 3 years ago, and it's time for someone else to lead this franchise to the next level.
              So there were better players available at the time of our picks, and they're hand over fist outplaying our rookies now? Draft picks ARE always luck of the draw. Top 10 picks can be a bust just as easy a 2nd rounder. Personally, I don't believe in building through the draft unless you're getting a Top 5 pick. With your line of thinking, every GM in the NBA should be fired for passing on a pick who later became an All-Star. Hindsight is 20/20.


              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post


                So there were better players available at the time of our picks, and they're hand over fist outplaying our rookies now? Draft picks ARE always luck of the draw. Top 10 picks can be a bust just as easy a 2nd rounder. Personally, I don't believe in building through the draft unless you're getting a Top 5 pick. With your line of thinking, every GM in the NBA should be fired for passing on a pick who later became an All-Star. Hindsight is 20/20.

                There is a difference in luck and knowing talent. Have you never questioned why some teams always come up with good players out of the draft while other teams don't, even when they don't have top 10 picks? Or why some teams when having top 10 picks aren't successful. You can't credit that to luck. It's called knowing talent. Some GM's are just better at evaluating talent than others, and Bird isn't one of the better evaluators of talent. Neither is MJ, just take a gander of some of his top 10 picks.
                Last edited by Justin Tyme; 12-28-2009, 10:12 AM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Donnie Walsh, Larry Bird, and Chris Mullin all said after the fact that it was Donnie Walsh's trade.



                  He drafted Bayless and traded he and Ike for Rush, Jack, and McRoberts. - You can say Bayless has more offensive talent, but you can also say Rush has more defensive talent. You can argue that Bayless would be our best option at PG right now, but you can also argue he's not even really a PG to begin with, but rather an undersized shooting guard. Jack was overall a net positive for us while he was here and we decided to not overpay to keep him. Josh was a no-risk, possible reward acquisition, and losing Ike appears to be inconsequential.

                  A debatable trade and actions that followed, for sure, but not anywhere close to "My God, what an idiot for doing that."

                  He traded Jermaine O'Neal and our 2nd round pick for TJ Ford, Rasho Nesterovic (and his expiring contract), Maceo Baston, and a 1st rounder he used on Roy Hibbert. - JO wanted out, was hurt, wasn't performing up to his role or his contract. Rasho was a big expiring and gave us a sometimes serviceable center while being a positive influence on Roy. TJ Ford looked halfway decent last year, through now of course it looks bad. Roy Hibbert has shown flashes of really being something, but has gone back to struggling. The jury is still out on him. Maceo was small fry in the deal, as was our 2nd rounder. All in all, what makes this a win is getting Rashos contract above all else, but TJ Ford wasn't a terrible piece to try out for JO (especially the JO we had, not the one you see in Miami these days).

                  Not a great result at this point, but again, hardly an obvious mistake and certainly could be argued to still have been an overall good thing.

                  Remember that before he got Jack and Ford in here, our best point guards were Flip Murray and Travis Diener. As horrific as it is to imagine, we really have improved our PG situation significantly since then.

                  With what little cap room he had to work with, he brought it cheap guys like Kareem Rush, Travis Diener, Solomon Jones, Dahntay Jones, and Earl Watson. None of which were expected to save the team, though most at least gave us something along the way. They were low risk, low reward signings.

                  Also don't forget that he had to deal with the Jamaal Tinsley situation. He didn't give him that contract or ask for him to end up the way that he did while he was here. JT's contract to this day is on our cap for another year and a half, further damaging our flexibility.



                  I agree, but I don't think the test to pass/fail two 13 picks and a 17th pick is whether or not they're all-stars. The jury is still out on all three of these guys. Sometimes they look pretty good, sometimes they don't. You can rarely if ever expect a 13th pick or a 17th pick to be an all-star player. Danny Granger is the exception, not the rule.

                  The main criticism that I find fair to make is that we seem to be going for guys that are more about having high floors as opposed to high ceilings. Considering the range we were picking I think it's reasonable. Debatable, for sure, but reasonable.

                  And the thing is, before that we took guys like Shawne Williams and James White, who potentially had pretty high ceilings, but both quickly flamed out. I believe those picks are what have swayed the Pacers into the direction they have gone in now.



                  I think a solid case has previously been made that Jim was the best coach out there who was both available and willing. We tried to get Stan Van Gundy, but he didn't want us.



                  Given that the extension doesn't prevent Jim from being fired at any time or a replacement coming in at any time, I view this as largely inconsequential.

                  In fact, initially I thought it was 100% meaningless in the big picture. I've only come around somewhat in that I worry about what it did to the morale of some of our players. Yes, you might argue they should suck it up regardless, but if Bird knew what it would do to some of these guys, he should have thought twice about doing this.



                  I certainly don't think he is solely to blame for this, but I agree he certainly shares the responsibility. I would just argue that he's by no means dug his own grave.

                  I think his moves have largely been understandable. That doesn't mean they all were universally loved by any stretch of the imagination or that they couldn't be second-guessed, but they were all at least understandable.

                  It's become obvious that Bird (and Morway) believe their best bet is to keep taking high floor guys as long as they're picking where they have been because they know their best bet at getting a big fish or two is in 2011 (be it a signing or a trade).

                  In other words, they're assembling all of the side dishes while they wait for the main dishes to finish being prepared (in 2011) to compliment Danny Granger and to truly have a complete meal in front of them.

                  Now, if this season continues as it has been, I wouldn't be shocked if they end up with a high ceiling guy this time around simply because of the higher pick they would have.

                  But if things get back to where they have been, they'll probably stick to the plan.

                  All I'm really trying to get at with all of this is that you can be upset with Bird to a point, but it's unreasonable to be forcing his head into the guillotine right now. Barring a series of disasters between now and Summer '11, I don't think he will have deserved such a fate.

                  If things aren't looking significantly up coming out of that 2011 summer, assuming nothing ridiculously bad has gone down in the meantime, then and only then is it time to get rid of him.
                  Hicks,

                  Points are valid, and I didnt want to paint the picture that I am totally unhappy with Bird.

                  As you pointed out , his trade with Portland I had no problem with, and thought they did a good job with the O'Neal trade. I also have no problem with the drafting of Roy. Tyler I didnt like only because he seemed redundant with McBob, but he has turned out better than I thought so far.

                  For what he had to work with, he has done an adequate job I guess , but the main thing is he has been the personal decision maker the last 3 years.

                  Also , I understand Walsh might have pulled the trigger on the GS trade, but best believe Bird co-signed off on it. To this day I can understand them taking one of the Murphy/Dun contracts but I will never, ever understand why they took both.

                  Hicks, do you not agree that this year and current situation is when Bird will have an opportunity to show what he is about. Either the ship sinks into the bottom of the abyss, or the super tanker begins to turn around

                  Its up to you Bird and company, dont talk about it , be about it.
                  Last edited by 90'sNBARocked; 12-28-2009, 10:27 AM.
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                    Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                    I was one of the first to argue this point when Walsh was in his final days with us. Since he left Bird has been nothin short of sensational in his player acquisitions IMO. We are just stuck with the trash left over from the Walsh era. Tinsley's contract, Murphy, Dun, and Ford, all of which are situations arising out of us trading the brawl away. We will NEVER be able to tell what kind of team we have until Ford, Murphy, and Dunleavy are gone. that is like 30 million bucks right there, and without them we are actually a better team. How do you not play 3 players who account for half of your teams salary and justify that to Simon?

                    The truth is we are a better team if these 3 players never play at all.
                    Bird brought in TJ Ford. Although I can see your enthusiasm for Bird I really question how you can say he has been "nothing short of sensational", seems really reaching
                    Sittin on top of the world!

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                      I believe Bird is in the final year of his contract. Why fire him now and bring in somebody else? The team has been rebuilding just not via the draft like Memphis and Minnesota.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                        Hicks, do you not agree that this year and current situation is when Bird will have an opportunity to show what he is about. Either the ship sinks into the bottom of the abyss, or the super tanker begins to turn around

                        Its up to you Bird and company, dont talk about it , be about it.
                        I honestly don't because there's nothing they can do right now except make a bad trade. There's only a small chance a good offer will appear in February and that would be because a team wants to try to rent one of our 2-year players knowing if it doesn't work out that they'll have that player as an expiring contract next season.

                        Otherwise, there's nothing they can do until the draft.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                          Originally posted by Jon Theodore
                          Bird has made some terrible decisions that were referenced in the first post, but he does sign a lot of autographs....which you really have to take into consideration.
                          Was this post serious?




                          .
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            It all comes down to 2011. If things look bad after that summer, it's time to clean house.
                            I generally agree with this, but considering we are looking at a potentially high draft pick, his apparent lack of skill in judging young talent and his inability to take risks scares me.

                            If Bird is goign to take a Patrick Patterson 5 spots too high and pass on Derrick Favors because Patterson is more "NBA Ready" then Bird needs to go before that happens because at this point, screwing up a top 5 pick is kind of devastating. (I have no problem with Patrick Patterson I think hes a good player).

                            Also if Bird is goign to sign guys like Dahntay Jones to 4 year contracts this summer that can also have a pretty damning effect on us. I'm just glad he doesnt have money to work with like he will 2 years from now. (I also have no problem with Dahntay I think hes been surprisingly solid for us... I just have a problem with the signing of Dahntay for this team at that point in time).

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                              Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                              I believe Bird is in the final year of his contract. Why fire him now and bring in somebody else? The team has been rebuilding just not via the draft like Memphis and Minnesota.

                              You are correct, it's Bird's final year of his contract. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. At the end of his contract, he shouldn't be given another one. I stated so in posts #1 and #65. I stated in #65 Bird shouldn't be fired. I just don't want to see Bird given a new contract. I want to see this team go to the next level, and I don't believe Bird has the ability or expertise to it.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Bird Needs To Go!

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                So, if the Bird's replacement will have more to work with to make the team better, then how do think it came to that point in the first place? Personally, JOB's extension is really the only boneheaded decision that Bird made. I'm curious to what you would have done with Artest and Jackson, JO/Tinsley bloated contracts (keeping in mind the players missed a lot of games due to injuries), the knowledge that every team in the NBA knows that you're being "forced" to make some moves, and low draft picks besides tank the season 2 years in a row? It's one thing to wake one morning, and say "Man, we really don't need Artest and Jackson" then wake up to read in the paper your best player wants to be traded. IMHO, I was shocked that Bird even moved JO's contract after 1-2 injuried ravaged seasons.
                                I have never really complained about the Artest trade (I think we got completely shafted on the deal and would have never taken back 2 awful contracts for ARtest/Harrington but understand that we were almost forced into the deal), and I have never complained about the JO trade (which I actually thought was good at the time, and still do).

                                The Tinsley thing was an absolutely ridiculous situation. Waive him if you cant trade him right away. What good exactly came out of holding him for a year? Did they not think the Player's Association would put too much pressure on them to hold him until he became an expiring contract? But whatever I don't complain because I don't think any harm ultimately came out of taht situation as well.

                                My main problem with Bird is that he's been completely shortsighted, tryin to win now (when we had no chance of doing so) rather than winning 3 years from now.

                                and yes if he drafted better / handled the Artest situation differently he would have more to work with. I'm not saying he didnt get dealt a crappy hand, I'm just saying he took that crappy hand and made it worse
                                Last edited by SkipperZ; 12-28-2009, 11:51 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X