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

I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

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

  • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

    Paul George doesn't have the strength right now to go up against the "SF's" in the league.... Whether its offensively or defensively.

    Comment


    • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I just can't get how any Pacers fan ever thinks this. I'm actually really sick of hearing this general "we need a mega-star" or "we must have a top 5 pick/tank" angles from a team that already proved that is wrong.

      Everyone acts like they knew about Reggie, Smits, playoff success, etc when the team lost 3-1 to the Knicks the year before Brown. At that time the team's best player was DETLEF, not Reggie. Det was back to back 6th man and the CURRENT all-star. It had been a few years since Reggie's ONLY AS appearance (at the time).

      So if you were living in that era with the views on Danny/talent we show now you would have said the following:

      1) Detlef is your best player, you build around him. And if you trade him it must be for another regular AS player (McKey was NOT that, so fail 1)

      2) Reggie is a nice SG but he's never going to be Jordan, he can't get his own shot, he's not a great defender and the team will never get to the Finals if he's your best player. I like him but he's just not good enough. (Fail 2 because they didn't upgrade him)

      3) Smits isn't the answer at C. He's not athletic enough and can defend the paint. He's a soft, touch scorer, not a power player and not a defensive force. (fail 3, no upgrade here either)


      By the way, there is also no way you can expect to get a borderline AS PF from the 2nd round, maybe even sent to Europe to improve his skills. Antonio Davis does not exist and no one thought he could exist.


      Also there is no way you could acquire Mark Jackson at that point. He's not with the team and all you are going to have is guys like Fleming, Workman or Michael Williams who are not enough to lead a team. They are good bench types but not elite team starters.


      And then the team swapped coaches, did trade down in total talent level for Larry Brown's desire*, had 2nd rounder Antonio return from Europe, and with Workman at point they went to the ECF game 7. And then they did it again the next year. And 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years later. 5 ECF in 7 years is ELITE, and they did this from years of .500 with no high picks, no major FA, and not even a regular AS.

      The Pacers have won using the team concept, and the Pistons reproved it a few years ago as well. I'd say even Memphis has proven it in recent years.




      In short, this team has nearly all the talent it needs right now. Maybe you need one more guy on the bench, maybe you need Tyler to improve a little (or upgrade him), maybe you could slightly upgrade DC or Roy, but you probably don't need to do all of those things.


      *As a reminder, Det was 19.6, 9.5, 6.0 the prior year, so #2 ppg, #1 rpg, #2 apg. Traded. I understand the defensive thing and I liked McKey, but people forget that Det was a killer offensive all-around threat and went on to be part of a multi-threat elite Seattle team (the Pacers justification was too many options, needed a defensive specialist...that's Brown-speak for justifying his random roster changes, like trading Jax then benching Rose, then asking for Jax back)
      I bet you play fantasy basketball don't you? Because it is obvious you have never stepped on the floor yourself outside a pick up game. I am always amused by the guys that belittle everyone's opinion that do not agree with them by using the most meaningless comparisons and stats that nobody can prove or disprove. Open your eyes and watch what happens on the floor. Do you honestly think that Danny is comparable in any way to Reggie. Reggie is one of the greatest clutch players in history. Danny has never been considered a clutch player. Those Pacer teams you keep referring to had one of the best point guards in the league at running a team. That is how Reggie got alot of those shots, the ball was delivered and on time. Do you honestly think Collison has those same abilities to do what Jackson did. The only similarity is that they neither one played defense. Everyone that thinks like you, hang their hats on the fact that we played the Bulls tough last year. We lost 3-1 and were blown out in an elimination game. We got beat in early games because we were completely out matched at the point. What makes you think that will be different this time?

      Comment


      • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

        Reggie Miller was a more clutch player than Danny Granger could ever dream of being. As all-around basketball players, honestly, it's close.

        Comment


        • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

          Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
          I bet you play fantasy basketball don't you? Because it is obvious you have never stepped on the floor yourself outside a pick up game. I am always amused by the guys that belittle everyone's opinion that do not agree with them by using the most meaningless comparisons and stats that nobody can prove or disprove. Open your eyes and watch what happens on the floor. Do you honestly think that Danny is comparable in any way to Reggie. Reggie is one of the greatest clutch players in history. Danny has never been considered a clutch player. Those Pacer teams you keep referring to had one of the best point guards in the league at running a team. That is how Reggie got alot of those shots, the ball was delivered and on time. Do you honestly think Collison has those same abilities to do what Jackson did. The only similarity is that they neither one played defense. Everyone that thinks like you, hang their hats on the fact that we played the Bulls tough last year. We lost 3-1 and were blown out in an elimination game. We got beat in early games because we were completely out matched at the point. What makes you think that will be different this time?
          First & I say this as a person who has horrid spelling, punctuation and general basic englis skills, paragraphs are your friend. You have some good things to say but I fear a lot of people will just pass them by because it's a little hard to read. Yes I am aware I often have the same problem.

          Second Reggie is considered one of the great clutch performers because of what happened in his 7th season and forward. Before that he was just another shooting guard who could score but couldn't defend.

          Also you are 100% correct here, Mark Jackson was the man. This is considered a Dale Davis video but the truth is it is really more of a Mark Jackson highlight film.

          However whenever I have a chance to spread the good word about Dale I will take it.



          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            I'd say that SF should be alittle thicker. Certainly there are Guards just as tall as SFs but generally the Forwards are a bit thicker.
            Ok I should have been more specific.

            How in the course of playing basketball is the small forward position different than the shooting guard.


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              First & I say this as a person who has horrid spelling, punctuation and general basic englis skills, paragraphs are your friend. You have some good things to say but I fear a lot of people will just pass them by because it's a little hard to read. Yes I am aware I often have the same problem.

              Second Reggie is considered one of the great clutch performers because of what happened in his 7th season and forward. Before that he was just another shooting guard who could score but couldn't defend.

              Also you are 100% correct here, Mark Jackson was the man. This is considered a Dale Davis video but the truth is it is really more of a Mark Jackson highlight film.

              However whenever I have a chance to spread the good word about Dale I will take it.
              Peck you keep repeating that Reggie became Reggie in his 7th year and that Danny's numbers are similar and all that but have you ever thought that there are a lot of players in the NBA in their 7th year whose numbers are similar to Reggie's? does that mean that they are going to be like RM? just because a player average the same numbers as X player in X year doesn't mean that player is going to be as good as X player.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Peck you keep repeating that Reggie became Reggie in his 7th year and that Danny's numbers are similar and all that but have you ever thought that there are a lot of players in the NBA in their 7th year whose numbers are similar to Reggie's? does that mean that they are going to be like RM? just because a player average the same numbers as X player in X year doesn't mean that player is going to be as good as X player.
                True but there is a huge similarity between Reggie & Danny. I'm waiting for someone to answer it for me here in post 219

                http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=69791&page=9


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  I'll be happy to answer your question if you will answer mine first.

                  What do you consdier the difference between a shooting guard and a small forward?
                  Here's what I posted the last time you asked. You must have missed it...

                  [QUOTE=Peck;1375167What about his style of play indicates he is a small forward instead of a shooting guard.
                  [/QUOTE]

                  lack of ball handling, lack of play making, inability to use his height as an advantage on offense, inability to drive around smaller quicker players, thinking he's kobe and shooting too many jumpers...

                  There's some offensive reasons. I'd say the first 2 are the most important. Having a sg that can handle and create would help our offense. We rely too much on our pgs right now.
                  Quote:
                  Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?
                  Depends on the roster, but typically your sg is quicker and a better ball handler than your sf. He's used to help initiate offense (run the PnR) with the pg. He's usually a good shooter. Normally he's not a good rebounder or shot blocker.

                  Your sf typically is a good defender, good rebounder, and he's able to knock down spot up jump shots. If he can block shots that's a plus. Normally he's an average ball handler.

                  This is obviously just basic stuff here, and it all depends on your roster. They can be interchangeable if you got a ball handler/playmaker at sf, but there aren't many of those.

                  Also why is he better closer to the rim when he has shown to be a very good perimeter defender against point guards let alone shooting guards?
                  Here's some defensive reasons...

                  rebounding, shot blocking, help defense, he'd be able to freelance for steals more because of less responsibility. Basically he could be our Lebron on defense.

                  All those things listed he is or will be better than Danny at.

                  Just because a player can guard sgs and pgs doesn't necessarily mean he should play a certain position. LeBron can guard 4 or 5 positions, but they don't put him at the sg. That's the type of impact I believe Paul will have eventually. I think he has 1st team defense type potential, and he'd be better off closer to the rim as long as we had someone that can handle other teams sgs. That doesn't mean he can't guard other positions at times.

                  Now can someone please come up with a list of reasons why they think his game is better suited for sg long term? (IMF maybe... since you think this opinion's stupid )

                  Comment


                  • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    True but there is a huge similarity between Reggie & Danny. I'm waiting for someone to answer it for me here in post 219

                    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=69791&page=9
                    Experience?

                    Both lost in the first round of playoff in their sixth year.
                    Both seen a drop in production but a rise in overall play in their 7th season.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      True but there is a huge similarity between Reggie & Danny. I'm waiting for someone to answer it for me here in post 219

                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=69791&page=9
                      Again Peck I think you can visualize if you wanted to that Danny can be as good as Reggie because Danny haven't had the chance to prove it yet, the point is that you can make the same case for a bunch of player in the NBA.

                      I know that people love to fantasize and compare the new Pacers with the old ones but the fact is that neither one of those players are as similar or as good as we like to think, comparing Danny to Reggie, PG to Rose, Hibbert to Smith, West to Dale and Mark to DC is not going to make us the old Pacers team.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                        Danny isn't untouchable, but you sure as heck better be getting a superstar player back.

                        I also think the talk of "Danny getting in PG's way is premature". George has shown flashes of offensive brilliance, but he still hasn't put it all together consistently on a night in and night out basis, and that's even true when Granger went down and he struggled.

                        Plus, as others have alluded to, George is an asset at SG with his length and freakish athleticsm at the position. He's quick enough to guard anyone there, but hardly anyone has that kind of length and athleticism which makes him a matchup nightmare and disruptive defensive force. It's a huge part of why our starting lineup is so long and tall. You put him at SF, and suddenly these traits aren't as advantageous anymore as these taller, stronger SF's get into his body and push him around, nullifying those attributes.

                        Also, who's starting in his spot?

                        -Dahntay is better served with his energy off the bench
                        -Lance can't hit a jumpshot
                        Last edited by PR07; 02-21-2012, 12:21 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                          Danny isn't untouchable, but you sure as heck better be getting a superstar player back.

                          I also think the talk of "Danny getting in PG's way is premature". George has shown flashes of offensive brilliance, but he still hasn't put it all together consistently on a night in and night out basis, and that's even true when Granger went down and he struggled.

                          Plus, as others have alluded to, George is an asset at SG with his length and freakish athleticsm at the position. He's quick enough to guard anyone there, but hardly anyone has that kind of length and athleticism which makes him a matchup nightmare and disruptive defensive force. It's a huge part of why our starting lineup is so long and tall. You put him at SF, and suddenly these traits aren't as advantageous anymore as these taller, stronger SF's get into his body and push him around, nullifying those attributes.
                          Danny is a good player, and obviously not untouchable. Honestly though I'd rather see him stay. That being said it is going to take a lot more than just Granger to bring a superstar here. Our best bet is free agency in the offseason. It's not worth gutting the team unless Dwight Howard is coming and signing an extension.
                          "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

                          Comment


                          • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                            One more thing... we can't create a team like we've had in the past and expect to compete against The LeBrons. The leagues different now. You better have a superstar and you better have athletic players that can run with them or you're not winning the 'ship'. JMO
                            Last edited by CJ Jones; 02-21-2012, 01:23 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                              One more thing... we can't create a team like the teams we've had in the past and expect to compete against The LeBrons. The leagues different now. You better have a superstar or you better have athletic players that can run with them or you're not winning the 'ship'. JMO
                              tell that to Detriot...
                              Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                              Comment


                              • Re: I dont think Danny Granger will be a Pacer at the deadline

                                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                                One more thing... we can't create a team like the teams we've had in the past and expect to compete against The LeBrons. The leagues different now. You better have a superstar and you better have athletic players that can run with them or you're not winning the 'ship'. JMO
                                How exactly are the LeBrons of today significantly better than the Jordans of back then?


                                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X