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

More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

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

  • #76
    Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

    Originally posted by GO!!!!! View Post
    Well actully the Hornets Drafted Kobe but meh...
    Yes, you are actually correct. But that doesn't count since the trade was made on draft day.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

      Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post

      Because I am a true Pacers fan
      This is something I'm tired of seeing. If everything was perfect the Pacers would be contending for an NBA championship. That's the way it is for both sides...those who want to win meaningless games now and those that want to tank. We all want the same thing in the end, we just have different opinions on how to get there.

      As I've said plenty of times all the "untrue" Pacer fans don't care if the win or lose right now...they don't really care about them at all...at least not until they are winning 50+ games again. Anyone sticking around still caring about the team is a true Pacer fan. People on both sides of the argument can be true Pacer fans.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        Detroit isn't "an exception" Detroit is an example of one way to build a basketball team. You're making this "one championship" sound like a miracle. That Detroit team was very good for a few years. They were conference champs twice, and won their devision from 05-08. My point is that team basketball wins, and wouldn't we all take the success Detroit had.
        I really wouldn't start arguing the Detroit angle until you first get a couple guys as good as Chauncey and Rasheed and perhaps a Defensive Player of the Year.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

          Originally posted by PacerFreak31 View Post
          DC do you just see 2 players with super star potential in this draft? I see 2 almost near misses and then about 3 or 4 that have potential to be and after that nothing but role players.
          I see one guy who has a good chance to be a top 10 player and another guy who has a good chance to be top 20 player.

          After that, I see a few guys who have the chance to be on the level of a Horford/Russell Westbrook. Now those guys by themselves aren't superstar franchise players, but they are building blocks and they are essential to their teams success. They are legitimate #2/#3 guys for very good teams.

          After that, I see a few guys who have a good chance to be on the level of a Gerald Wallace . Guys like Aminu or Wes Johnson, for example.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

            Originally posted by d_c View Post
            I really wouldn't start arguing the Detroit angle until you first get a couple guys as good as Chauncey and Rasheed and perhaps a Defensive Player of the Year.
            I'm not arguing that we don't need to add more talent. I'm arguing that we don't need a superstar, and that a few upgrades and better coaching/style could make us a very good team.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
              I'm not arguing that we don't need to add more talent. I'm arguing that we don't need a superstar, and that a few upgrades and better coaching/style could make us a very good team.
              Sure, I buy that. But the point of this thread (and others like it) is highlighting the discussion that, in order to add more talent, the Pacers need a higher draft pick.

              It's all a probabilities game, but the higher you pick, the higher the probability you'll add a more talented player. Keep picking at the same spot that the Pacers have picked at (late lottery) the past few seasons and it's more likely you're just going to keep posting the same statement you just made season after season.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                Originally posted by Merz View Post
                This is something I'm tired of seeing. If everything was perfect the Pacers would be contending for an NBA championship. That's the way it is for both sides...those who want to win meaningless games now and those that want to tank. We all want the same thing in the end, we just have different opinions on how to get there.

                As I've said plenty of times all the "untrue" Pacer fans don't care if the win or lose right now...they don't really care about them at all...at least not until they are winning 50+ games again. Anyone sticking around still caring about the team is a true Pacer fan. People on both sides of the argument can be true Pacer fans.
                Let me clarify.

                I am not trying to say anyone advocating tanking is not a true fan.

                If it came off that way, then I apologize.

                Even though I may completely disagree with that opinion, I *DO*
                understand your reasons for having it.

                I was simply trying to say, that as a dedicated, passionate fan,
                I simply cannot abide rooting for my team to lose.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                  Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                  *sigh*

                  I feel like I am out on an island by myself here.

                  I can't believe that this is the prevailing opinion. Baffles me completely.
                  I'm actually with you on this.

                  Until pretty recently, I still wasn't sure where I stood. I think that we have definitely missed opportunities the last two years, although it's turning out we've also picked up some unlikely gems in the last two drafts, with Price and now, as Hibbert continues to improve, he's looking more like a steal at pick #17.

                  That said, I do not think that it's the end of the world if we don't pick up that Great Player in this year's draft. After next season--or possibly by midseason, depending on what we get for our expiring contracts--we're in the drivers seat to pick up any upcoming FAs or be involved in a trade where we do NOT have to match salaries with the other team, due to being so far under the cap.

                  I also look at it this way: if we pick up a superstar in this year's draft, we're not going to be able to sign anyone else for long-term plans because all that cap space will need to go, in a couple of years, to resigning that superstar to a big contract--or not being able to afford a demand for a max contract, which is very likely, and losing that player anyways.

                  I would rather we get another player of Granger's caliber, an all-star player who doesn't demand 20mil/yr. A workhorse, with very good offense and very good defense, who's a cornerstone for this team without the superstar flash and hype that a 25-30ppg top tier star will command. Deron Williams, Devin Harris, Tony Parker, those kinda guys.

                  Then we have to hope that somewhere in the back of this year's top 10 draft picks there's a PF who will have that same hard working mentality. A 15/10 guy who takes the defensive pressure off of Hibbert, because we know what Roy can do offensively when he stays in the game. Being paired in the post with Troy and Danny puts too much on his shoulders defensively.

                  In short (too late I know) we don't need an ICON and a SUPERSTAR necessarily. We need a couple more guys like Danny, Roy, and, yes...like Earl Watson as well.

                  And maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but as I'm watching these guys play lately, I don't feel like I'm watching a team that's hit bottom and needs to start over by getting that one Special Player. I'm starting to feel like we're a lot closer to being good, than we are to pathetic, and what's needed might be as simple as one more really good player and a coaching style that fits the team we have.
                  Last edited by ToasterBusVIP; 03-22-2010, 01:22 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                    So we need one more player on the level of Hibbert and Rush and one more all-star player then we're set, huh? Based on your logic, we're over halfway to having a good team.
                    I think that's probably true and I'd argue that a sign of that is when you frequently compete in or win against teams you shouldn't. We do that too often to be able to say that it's just a fluke of being taken lightly. There is enough talent on this team to compete, but you still feel like there's something missing. My feeling is that this "something" usually ends up being a defensive stopper that keeps opponents from driving into the lane and making Hibbert foul in a desperate attempt to block some guard's shot down low. Typically there is no 5th option on the floor at the PG spot, there's no threat there. When we get strong play from Hibbert as we did tonight, that negates some of the ARGH-ness of O'Briens style of play, there has to be a balance of post play and spreading the floor and I'm hopefully that balance can be achieved despite the current playcalling tendencies. We need to be able to play physical, too, so that we're not just competitive with these top teams but can grab those wins.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                      I also think we would be smart not to just simply let Troy and Dun walk next season. They're both extremely valuable as probably your first two guys off the bench on a very good team, but they have roles, especially Troy, while their shortcomings are obvious and can be taken advantage of if they play starter's minutes. I would be thrilled to see them both come back at something like 4mil/yr and provide great offense and something of a changeup off the bench.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                        Originally posted by ToasterBusVIP View Post
                        but you still feel like there's something missing. My feeling is that this "something" usually ends up being a defensive stopper that keeps opponents from driving into the lane
                        is adding a defensive stopper "missing something" by tanking and drafting

                        a talented player not an option? he could be a another franchise player

                        along with granger. even if he wants max contract afterwise we could

                        always trade him in good player in return. If you think there is a soon to

                        be FA who is quite likely to sign with pacers(also a player who pacers

                        want) please give me some hint. considering the expiring contracts and

                        birds comments it seems pacers are looking for FA and S&T.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                          TMJ31, if you've followed this board long enough....over the last couple of seasons with a 9th place finishes.....the board was polarized on this very issue....with many falling on both sides of the issue to tank or not to tank ( somewhat equally from season to season ).

                          I'm guessing that if you polled those that advocated to "not tank" last season ( who probably thought the same thing in the 2007-2008 season ) and asked them whether we should tank or not this season.....you'll find that there probably is a large # that have "switched to the Dark side" and decided that it maybe better to tank....or ( at the very least ) giving younger Players ( AJ / McRoberts ) and future core Players ( like Inferno ) more minutes together over Dunleavy/Ford/Murphy/Watson ( with the hope of developing/evaluating while accepting losses ).

                          You are totally entitled to your opinion....as I have shared this very same feeling over the last 2 seasons. This very issue is still a very polarizing one where those that support either side are very ardent in their stance.....but the mere fact that there are way more here on PD ( which I consider to be "hardcore Pacer fans" ) advocating "tanking" over "not tanking" ( especially when it comes to those that switched sides from last season to this season....me being one ) is very telling.

                          I'm not for tanking...I'm all for playing our young Players, while evaluating/developing them and teaching them to go out and do their best to win.....it's a balence between achieving short and long term goals where I do not see this as a "black and white" issue....but one with "shades of gray"......where it's a matter of perspective. If we win or lose while doing this....I'm totally cool with it. I would not be complaining now if we won these last couple of games while playing AJ/McRoberts more. It's great that we won against a Team like the Thunder.....but I can tell you that this feeling will give way soon after we start losing again. This doesn't mean that I'm okay with losing...it just means that we all know that this feeling is "fleeting" given how bad we have been this season ( think the 5 game winning streak at the beginning of the season and then the rest of the season after that ).
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            TMJ31, if you've followed this board long enough....over the last couple of seasons with a 9th place finishes.....the board was polarized on this very issue....with many falling on both sides of the issue to tank or not to tank ( somewhat equally from season to season ).

                            I'm guessing that if you polled those that advocated to "not tank" last season ( who probably thought the same thing in the 2007-2008 season ) and asked them whether we should tank or not this season.....you'll find that there probably is a large # that have "switched to the Dark side" and decided that it maybe better to tank....or ( at the very least ) giving younger Players ( AJ / McRoberts ) and future core Players ( like Inferno ) more minutes together over Dunleavy/Ford/Murphy/Watson ( with the hope of developing/evaluating while accepting losses ).

                            You are totally entitled to your opinion....as I have shared this very same feeling over the last 2 seasons. This very issue is still a very polarizing one where those that support either side are very ardent in their stance.....but the mere fact that there are way more here on PD ( which I consider to be "hardcore Pacer fans" ) advocating "tanking" over "not tanking" ( especially when it comes to those that switched sides from last season to this season....me being one ) is very telling.

                            I'm not for tanking...I'm all for playing our young Players, while evaluating/developing them and teaching them to go out and do their best to win.....it's a balence between achieving short and long term goals where I do not see this as a "black and white" issue....but one with "shades of gray"......where it's a matter of perspective. If we win or lose while doing this....I'm totally cool with it. I would not be complaining now if we won these last couple of games while playing AJ/McRoberts more. It's great that we won against a Team like the Thunder.....but I can tell you that this feeling will give way soon after we start losing again. This doesn't mean that I'm okay with losing...it just means that we all know that this feeling is "fleeting" given how bad we have been this season ( think the 5 game winning streak at the beginning of the season and then the rest of the season after that ).
                            You are absolutely right.

                            Being a mediocre team, with flashes of brilliance followed by prolonged stretches of ineptitude has taken its toll on Pacer fans.

                            I know that many loyal fans here would probably have sided with the "don't tank" side of the debate 1 or 2 years ago, but now have switched allegiances.

                            I honestly cannot fault anyone for this viewpoint.

                            To be honest, this thread has turned into something that I did not intend for it to be.

                            I merely wished to inform people of a rather (in my opinion) disturbing conversation I had with Mike Wells on Twitter, and get some feedback (via the poll) as to whether or not the general fan populace agreed with Mike or not.

                            The fact that I was vastly outnumbered by those with opposing views to mine took me by surprise, since this is after all *THE* greatest Indiana Pacers fan site in existence, and I assumed that my view of hoping for the team to do well (in the immediate future) would be shared.

                            But as you and I both mentioned, losing has taken its toll, and many are now resigned to the fact that hitting rock bottom may be the only solution. While I disagree, I cannot fault those who feel this way.

                            So if I came off as combative or defensive in my replies in this thread, I assure you all that it was just my frustrations as a die hard fan manifesting in the only way I could muster.

                            We all love the Pacers, of that I have no doubt. Many of us have differing views on how to "right the ship", but at the end of the day we are all on the same team.

                            I respect and admire everyone on this board for giving me years of insightful and impassioned Pacers discussion to look forward to. Infact, several years ago many members of this board even attempted to help me with a personal situation (Pacers related, but also a very bad "real life" situation), and I have not forgotten that incredible showing of support and goodwill in a bad time of my life.

                            I would certainly hope that the general populace of PD still regards me favorably despite the turbulent nature of this thread. Although I often get wrapped up in my emotions (Actor's curse I tell ya!), I have always and will always consider PD my "Pacers family".

                            No matter what happens with our W/L record, the lottery, and this offseason... I hope we can all remember that our ultimate goals and desires for this team are unified, and that we can engage in some great discussions during that journey.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                              Originally posted by ToasterBusVIP View Post
                              I think that's probably true and I'd argue that a sign of that is when you frequently compete in or win against teams you shouldn't. We do that too often to be able to say that it's just a fluke of being taken lightly. There is enough talent on this team to compete, but you still feel like there's something missing. My feeling is that this "something" usually ends up being a defensive stopper that keeps opponents from driving into the lane and making Hibbert foul in a desperate attempt to block some guard's shot down low.
                              I would submit the other thing we need is an absolute stone cold offensive killer that can get that "over the hump" basket to knife some of these teams and put them away. Danny can sometimes, as well as others, but we need one of "those" guys that can do it any time. That kind of mentality can be contagious and could keep some of these games from even getting close in the end.
                              http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                              "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: More Fuel to the Lottery Standings Fire...

                                Originally posted by d_c View Post
                                Yep. Everyone who says they can win without a superstar is pointing at 1 example (and it's always the same single example) compared to 20 examples that counter their argument.

                                And the fans who use that argument are almost always fans of a team that don't even have a player as good as Chauncey Billups.
                                So what you're basically saying is that NO MATTER who we get via trade or draft, if it's not a Superstar, then we'll NEVER win a championship? Personally, I don't believe that garbage, and personally I'm not a fan of your thinking anyways. You've been bagging on Hibbert and Rush all season long, because "there are others like them".


                                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

                                Working...
                                X