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

Wells Tweets

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

  • Re: Wells Tweets

    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
    Cleveland was doing pretty well. Denver had some very good teams. New Orleans has had some good teams as well.

    Hasn't stopped them before.
    The point is they will leave if the grass is greener. LeBron tried with the Cavs and he tried multiple times. They weren't getting Cbosh or Wade. The same goes for Melo and Chris Paul.

    The fact is its easier for players to build a team than it is for a GM but the player will often to choose a bigger sexier market than Indiana.

    Comment


    • Re: Wells Tweets

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      Hibbert/Howard
      Howard/HandsBro
      Granger/George
      George/Hill
      Paul/Collison

      Can you say "championship?" That would be the best team in the NBA IMO, and absolutely BEASTLY on the defensive end.

      Is there really any reason Howard and Paul would not want to come to Indy to team up unless it's about the weather/being in a small market? Give Dwight the max and Paul the mini-max and we're in business.
      Amazing. All they have to do is wait one year and both Chris Paul/Deron Williams and Howard could come here and win the championship every year AND get paid.

      I don't get it.

      Comment


      • Re: Wells Tweets

        Originally posted by Solomon Grundy View Post
        Something tells me that Crawford is going to demand a pretty large salary, somewhere over $10 million or so. Seems to me there are other scoring SG in free agency right now like Reggie Williams and Nick Young who can score on any given night as well. The only issue is that I think both are restricted free agents (and Nick Young is a bit of a headcase).
        Headcase or not, Nick Young and Paul George are really good friends. Young is quite talented, and it would be great to see him playing alongside George, especially as they are both explosive and competitive players. However, Young does not appeal to me as much/well as Crawford, due to Jamal's veteranship, and proven clutch ability.

        And I really want him to teach Paul George to do (and master) the Shake-n-Bake.
        witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

        Originally posted by Day-V
        In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
        Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


        Comment


        • Re: Wells Tweets

          Originally posted by imbtyler View Post
          Headcase or not, Nick Young and Paul George are really good friends. Young is quite talented, and it would be great to see him playing alongside George, especially as they are both explosive and competitive players. However, Young does not appeal to me as much/well as Crawford, due to Jamal's veteranship, and proven clutch ability.

          And I really want him to teach Paul George to do (and master) the Shake-n-Bake.
          Reggie Jackson and Paul are even better friends even had Thanksgiving together

          but really who cares if they are friends? It is basketball not friendship but Nick Young isnt leaving the Wizards he wants to be there and the Wizards want him.

          Comment


          • Re: Wells Tweets

            @MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
            Paul George put on 8 pounds of muscle and he used the challenge of guarding D Rose n the playoffs as where he needs to be defensively
            .

            Comment


            • Re: Wells Tweets

              I will give Durant some credit. He could have just forced his way out. I give Reggie as much credit for not chasing the ring in Boston as for staying with the Pacers his entire career.
              {o,o}
              |)__)
              -"-"-

              Comment


              • Re: Wells Tweets

                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                .@MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
                Paul George put on 8 pounds of muscle and he used the challenge of guarding D Rose n the playoffs as where he needs to be defensively
                That sounds like someone who is serious about their future in this league.
                To me Paul George is the future and off limits to trade scenarios.

                Comment


                • Re: Wells Tweets

                  Paul is going to be something else.
                  In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Wells Tweets

                    Originally posted by JB24 View Post
                    No it hasn't. Durant agreed to the same post-rookie scale extension all these other superstars signed.

                    Get back to me four years from now.
                    Originally posted by JB24 View Post
                    He was restricted. The Thunder would have matched ANY offer that was extended. He was smart enough to realize this and re-signed early on to avoid any drama (just like Lebron, Melo, Paul, Howard etc... before him).

                    It's a whole other ball game when he comes close to becoming unrestricted in 4 years. Call me a cynic but I see this whole charade coming up again when that happens...
                    Actually, he didn't.

                    LeBron, Wade, and Bosh all signed 3-year extensions with a player option for the fourth year. Their goal was to become free agents in the first year they were eligible to get 30% of the salary cap as a starting max salary. Deron Williams did the same a year later.

                    Melo signed a 3-year extension with a team option for the 4th.

                    Howard signed a 5-year extension, but with an early termination option for the 5th year, which is what he is exercising.

                    Kevin Durant signed a full 5-year extension with no outs for either side. He committed as fully to Oklahoma City as he possibly could. He did it regardless of market size, and he chose it over the several other options shown above that could have made him a free agent much sooner.

                    He did it, because Oklahoma City is a very well-run organization with a strong front office, coaching staff, and collection of young players. He did it for the same reason that Tim Duncan stayed in San Antonio.

                    The organization.

                    And while being in smaller or less attractive (for some) markets didn't help Utah or Cleveland or Toronto, and won't help Orlando or New Orleans or the Nets, it is not what cost them their superstars. Hell, Toronto is a huge, cosmopolitan market.

                    What cost these teams their stars is the fact they couldn't get their **** together. Cleveland and Orlando got close, then floundered. Toronto, New Orleans, and Utah never really got close. I don't even know where to start with the Nets.

                    Run your team well, prove that you're going to put your star in a position to win big, and you'll keep that star in New Orleans, Portland, Charlotte, or Indy - or Oklahoma City or San Antonio. If you draft that guy, then you get at least 6 years to prove yourself.

                    Run your team poorly, or without a clear direction, and the guy will look elsewhere.

                    Seems like a reasonable set up to me.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Wells Tweets

                      That's logical and is the case a majority of the time, but almost all of last season and this offseason's talk has focused on Carmelo Anthony and now Chris Paul going to the Knicks, one of the most poorly run organizations in the NBA that also hasn't won in ten years.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Wells Tweets

                        Originally posted by count55 View Post
                        What cost these teams their stars is the fact they couldn't get their **** together. Cleveland and Orlando got close, then floundered. Toronto, New Orleans, and Utah never really got close. I don't even know where to start with the Nets.

                        Run your team well, prove that you're going to put your star in a position to win big, and you'll keep that star in New Orleans, Portland, Charlotte, or Indy - or Oklahoma City or San Antonio. If you draft that guy, then you get at least 6 years to prove yourself.

                        Run your team poorly, or without a clear direction, and the guy will look elsewhere.

                        Seems like a reasonable set up to me.
                        So why was the organization in Seattle not good enough to win until they got their star in Durant? Why couldn't they attract a star through Free Agency if they were so good and avoid the crash that led to drafting Durant? Where was San Antonio until they got Duncan?

                        The biggest problem I have is that the primary success factor for small market teams is luck. Once you luck into a player, then it takes management skills to keep him, but until you luck into a player your management skills are all for naught. The converse is that for an attractive market team, players want to move there for reasons outside your management abilities - for those teams, it almost takes a horrible management to screw it up.

                        It is exacerbated because the NBA game can be so completely transformed by a single player.

                        "I want to get out of my current situation" is a sign that the team management is a problem and that the player needs to move on. I think most of us accept that as part of what Free Agency is supposed to allow players to do, especially since players in such a circumstance seldom close doors to going to teams that have better situations no matter who they are.

                        "I want to go to (specific team)" is a sign that the player wants something other than just better management - after all, few people can point to NYK as having had stellar management over the last decade. I think most of us have a feeling that management is an excuse in this circumstance, meaning it is difficult to say that if management of the current team were any better the player wouldn't have the same motivation ("I want to play with my buddies") to leave.

                        There has to be some way to balance it so players can leave bad situations but so they don't just congregate on specific teams (meaning other teams can't prove whether they are well managed until they get lucky - and also meaning that the other teams can't put together a good supporting cast because all the good supporting cast members are going to the teams the stars are congregating toward). I wish I had the answer.
                        Last edited by BillS; 12-03-2011, 01:42 PM.
                        BillS

                        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Wells Tweets

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          Actually, he didn't.

                          LeBron, Wade, and Bosh all signed 3-year extensions with a player option for the fourth year. Their goal was to become free agents in the first year they were eligible to get 30% of the salary cap as a starting max salary. Deron Williams did the same a year later.

                          Melo signed a 3-year extension with a team option for the 4th.

                          Howard signed a 5-year extension, but with an early termination option for the 5th year, which is what he is exercising.

                          Kevin Durant signed a full 5-year extension with no outs for either side. He committed as fully to Oklahoma City as he possibly could. He did it regardless of market size, and he chose it over the several other options shown above that could have made him a free agent much sooner.

                          He did it, because Oklahoma City is a very well-run organization with a strong front office, coaching staff, and collection of young players. He did it for the same reason that Tim Duncan stayed in San Antonio.

                          The organization.

                          And while being in smaller or less attractive (for some) markets didn't help Utah or Cleveland or Toronto, and won't help Orlando or New Orleans or the Nets, it is not what cost them their superstars. Hell, Toronto is a huge, cosmopolitan market.

                          What cost these teams their stars is the fact they couldn't get their **** together. Cleveland and Orlando got close, then floundered. Toronto, New Orleans, and Utah never really got close. I don't even know where to start with the Nets.

                          Run your team well, prove that you're going to put your star in a position to win big, and you'll keep that star in New Orleans, Portland, Charlotte, or Indy - or Oklahoma City or San Antonio. If you draft that guy, then you get at least 6 years to prove yourself.

                          Run your team poorly, or without a clear direction, and the guy will look elsewhere.

                          Seems like a reasonable set up to me.
                          Good post and fair enough. I wasn't aware of the exact terms of the individual contracts, so i'll defer to your knowledge of this stuff.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Wells Tweets

                            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                            The point is they will leave if the grass is greener. LeBron tried with the Cavs and he tried multiple times. They weren't getting Cbosh or Wade. The same goes for Melo and Chris Paul.

                            The fact is its easier for players to build a team than it is for a GM but the player will often to choose a bigger sexier market than Indiana.
                            So you are saying that if the Miami roster looked like the Warriors and the Pacers had the money to sign Paul and Wade, that Lebron would say "nah, I need to go to a sexy market instead".

                            BS, no way. Miami happened to be the place with the money, mostly because NY, NY and Miami dumped cash like maniacs to get to this point.

                            Had it been Utah, Indy and Millwaukee with the cash you can be sure that the Lebron, Wade, Bosh show would have happily cashed in there instead.


                            A - I'm kind of a baby and want to make winning easier by chasing after a loaded team

                            B - I want to play on a team with my friend (nothing wrong with that)

                            C - I like money (standard for most people)

                            D - I'm tired of my current boss continuing to not run a very good "company" and I feel like this situation is never getting better

                            E - oh, and even though I can spend half a year living in a tropical paradise, maybe not even in the US, I have to make sure that for the other half that I only spend half of that time in a boring city (the other half of that will be road games anyway).


                            If Lebron was in Indy he'd easily be out of here during the offseason and during the season he'd only be in town during home game stints.


                            Comparing that to being on the road with your boy, crushing teams by being loaded up, and getting paid big money to do this, the whole "not in Indy" thing pales in comparison. It's not even in the same ball park.



                            PS - Tim Duncan was a FULL free agent and stayed in San Antonio. SA, like Indy, is a sprawling metro area that makes it seem like a big population center but is actually rather small town in comparison to places like Houston, Boston or Oakand.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Wells Tweets

                              So why was the organization in Seattle not good enough to win until they got their star in Durant? Why couldn't they attract a star through Free Agency if they were so good and avoid the crash that led to drafting Durant? Where was San Antonio until they got Duncan?
                              Seattle is a massive metro center, very dense population with a great per capita income level. In terms of cool, trendy cities it's way, way up there.

                              Seattle also had a long history of winning in multiple eras.

                              Their movement was like saying Cleveland couldn't support the Browns. Those aren't small town situations, those were just d*** moves by some owner who had another suitor on the payola hook.

                              If Toronto could come up with 10 billion dollars they could buy and move the whole Heat team if they wanted. That wouldn't prove Miami was small time or unattractive any more than the Sonics move did.



                              It sure is funny how no one was complaining about this unfair advantage Miami had when they sucked and the Sonics and Cavs were both killing it. Rony Seikaly vs Kemp/Daugherty for the loss. Poor Miami, they'll never get stars down there with Rony as their main guy, and Seattle/Cleveland get all the FAs on the cheap because they want to join Price/BD or Glove/Kemp and make a title run.



                              It just sounds so whiny. Were the entire 90's domination by Seattle, Cleveland, Utah and Indy not enough? Because of Jordan all that is thrown out the door? Even when 2nd half of the 90s also featured the San Antonio run?

                              Nope, the second any of those teams fall off and a sniff of LA, NY, BOS (and now MIA) win a little it's "see, I told you it was unbalanced". Yes, based on the 90's it was unbalanced and most big city teams were totally F'd unless you had Jordan.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Wells Tweets

                                Originally posted by owl View Post
                                I am waiting for the day when a superstar does something other than choose the big market. How refreshing would that be?
                                Tim Duncan asks you to stop waiting and start watching the NBA.

                                So do John Stockton and Karl Malone.




                                Classic logic fallacy at play here, people focus on the evidence of what they believe and ignore the evidence that counters it. In their mind there is this lopsided list but in reality it's more like 50/50.


                                You change what counts as a big city or a "good market" to fit who is good. For example when Chicago got snubbed like crazy after Jordan left (most notable was both Grant Hill and Tim Duncan), I didn't hear any "well I guess that whole big-city with money thing was wrong discussions. Instead it was more "exception that proves the rule" BS non-logic, or "sure but the owner is a jerk".

                                I mean guys skip going to LA all the time...when its the Clippers. San Francisco is huge and insanely cool compared to most US cities but since the Warriors technically play across the Bay (since the whole place is one giant metro super-plex that sprawls to Silicon Valley) no one thinks of NBA elites enjoying their time at Coppola's winery (and H'wood stars he knows) with some supermodel on their day off.


                                Atlanta by most measures would be a primo destination for NBA stars since it's got moderate weather year round, tons of money and even a demographic that is closer to the NBA demographic that most cities. But no one thinks "oh, the Knicks have no shot if the Hawks are making an offer".




                                PS - if you play in Indy you play for an NBA LEGEND. You've got Magic, Larry and Jordan at that level of stature and drawing power. You walk to center court in Conseco and Larry Legend comes walking out of the tunnel to meet you, that's a pretty good sales pitch for a lot of QUALITY players.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X