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

This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

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

  • #91
    Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    As I said, our definitions vary. I don't believe that someone has to be a geezer in order to be a vet. But he certainly has to have tons of basketball experience at the highest level of bball if he wants to be a vet at a young (read: below 28) age.
    I would conclude that to be NBA playoffs. Paul has more playoff experience at 23 than, say, Mike Dunleavy at 33. Age alone, doesn't bring you experience.

    IMHO Paul should be considered a "vet" already, and definitely by this next season. He's had more weight on his shoulders by the age of 24 than Danny did by the age of 30.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      I would conclude that to be NBA playoffs. Paul has more playoff experience at 23 than, say, Mike Dunleavy at 33. Age alone, doesn't bring you experience.

      IMHO Paul should be considered a "vet" already, and definitely by this next season. He's had more weight on his shoulders by the age of 24 than Danny did by the age of 30.
      That's a good point as well.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
        As I said, our definitions vary. I don't believe that someone has to be a geezer in order to be a vet. But he certainly has to have tons of basketball experience at the highest level of bball if he wants to be a vet at a young (read: below 28) age.
        There's certainly no scientific way to quantify it. But I think that everyone would have considered Granger to be a "vet" in his 7th season when he was leading us in scoring and we won a lot of games. Thus, I think 6th year Hibbert as a multi-time all star who is currently the longest tenured player on the team is without question a vet.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          There's certainly no scientific way to quantify it. But I think that everyone would have considered Granger to be a "vet" in his 7th season when he was leading us in scoring and we won a lot of games. Thus, I think 6th year Hibbert as a multi-time all star who is currently the longest tenured player on the team is without question a vet.
          I'll agree that there is no scientific way to quantify it. Some players are obviously vets (Garnett, Duncan, Ray Allen etc.) and others are obviously not close to vets at all (every 1st-2nd year player) but a lot of players are in a grey area and it's hard to say who is a vet and who isn't when they are in that area. Therefore, it's normal for those differences in opinion to occur
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

            It's not the mere fact of having been in the league x number of years, it's how other players see you and whether that trtanslates into being a locker room voice.

            I can't see Roy, with his tendency to navel-gaze, ever being the vet who stands up in the locker room and helps the team work out what's going on. Paul maybe, but the "best guy" on the team often can't tell why other players are struggling because they are so different - that's why great players very seldom make good coaches and GMs (and why Bird is such an impressive exception). West's leadership is being the tough cop - he needs a partner to make that work.
            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


            • #96
              Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

              there're veterans and then there are leaders. people conflate the two far too often. the league's full of vets, only a handful of vets are leaders. people need to stop expecting a guy that's got a dozen years in the league or whatever to obviously be a leader in the locker room, that dude can be just as toxic as the hotshot newcomer. ask Jermaine O'Neal.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                Danny would definitely be helping us with his zero points, zero rebounds, and zero assists. The broken down player is not playing, and people are still pining for him. Unbelievable. Danny's body took him away from the Pacers, stop blaming Larry Bird. He got two warm bodies for a broken down player, and we saved some cash. Unless Danny is secretly the real Zen Master, then New York just wasted a lot of money, and Danny is about to be the best coach in NBa history.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                  Players in all sports say that if a player is not playing at the moment that their abilities as a leader in the room are greatly diminished. The active players are focused on each other and the coaching staff and tend not to listen to players not playing at the moment. The Reds all said this about Scott Rolen and the Yankees said this about Jeter last year. The fact that ET's impact on the team is a net negative is another story, but Danny would be doing very little for this team injured.
                  Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                  http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                    I guess it should be said that this season should have been one that someone stepped up to be a LEADER, but it does not seem like that has happened, all we can do is hope that it happens during the playoffs. To me what makes a good leader is followers that respect and listen to him, doesn't have to be how many years he has been on the team, but more about his composure and and ability to make others believe in him. I think people wanted PG to turn into this but he has not yet and maybe never will, so where do we go from here?
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                      Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
                      Danny would definitely be helping us with his zero points, zero rebounds, and zero assists. The broken down player is not playing, and people are still pining for him. Unbelievable. Danny's body took him away from the Pacers, stop blaming Larry Bird. He got two warm bodies for a broken down player, and we saved some cash. Unless Danny is secretly the real Zen Master, then New York just wasted a lot of money, and Danny is about to be the best coach in NBa history.
                      So, how do you explain the fact that the team started struggling after the trade? The splits indicate a pretty big discrepancy between how the team played prior to the trade and how they played after it.

                      If the trade is not a part of it then what happened?

                      PS: If every person in this forum is free to blame every single player of this team then I'm also free to include Larry Bird in the "blame game". It's extremely simple. Win as a team, lose as a team.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        So, how do you explain the fact that the team started struggling after the trade? The splits indicate a pretty big discrepancy between how the team played prior to the trade and how they played after it.

                        If the trade is not a part of it then what happened?

                        PS: If every person in this forum is free to blame every single player of this team then I'm also free to include Larry Bird in the "blame game". It's extremely simple. Win as a team, lose as a team.
                        well lets see PGs play significantly declined.. think knocking up a stripper may have more to do with that than DG leaving the pacers.

                        I cant believe were still debating this same tired *** topic. Grangers not gonna get paid **** in FA. maybe 2.5 million at most for 2 seasons. Evan Turner will likely receive MLE and Allen approx. the same as Granger.

                        imo that indicates Bird did what was best for the Franchise. Were a small market media,,, cant pay players 14 million two seasons in a row to cheerlead off the bench. If Danny was playing well he would not have gotten traded to begin with. Were not discussing the same DG from 2012 series.

                        If Danny Grangers so darn vital to this teams success purely based on lockerroom leadership than DWEST and GHILL are not doing their jobs. With Hill that's likely very true.

                        Im sure there is a shred of truth to the DG trade impacting the team but not 2 months later. at some point the players have to take responsibility and be held accountable.

                        I doubt anyone offers Granger more than 2.5 million,, the reason why you ask.... because he no longer the same player he once was. When are people going to stop living in fantasy land and under the notion Grangers 7 points off the bench was the reason for this teams decline.

                        How bout pinpointing the real reason.. the offense sucks. how in gods green earth was danny going to make any difference at all??? and that's working under the assumption that Danny actually stayed healthy enuff to stay on the court... which facts are facts he is not playing and may not for the clippers.

                        danny or evan doesn't matter,, the second unit has been bad all season... if that's the case I would still prefer the trade because the pacers actually got two players that are healthy, young and can contribute beyond this season.

                        We are a small market franchise... keeping danny for sentimental reasons alone and not evaluating his on the court production is ridiculous.


                        I guarantee most of the ones on here still *****ing about the DG trade would not be willing to offer DG the same contract that Copeland received this offseason.

                        face it... all signs point to Dannys best days behind him. its unfortunate but the guy has 70 million so I think he will be alright.


                        its simply absurd to suggest the only reason this team won 49 games and advanced to the ECF was because Granger was in the lockerroom... and that it has nothing to do with actual talent on the court. Team won without Granger for the past two seasons... yet without Danny in the lockerroom were a .500 team.

                        makes no ******** sense and just tired of hearing the ill conceived fallicies this board continues to dream up in regards to DG.


                        Bird put this team together that has won 55 games and is now considered a title contender. Let him run the mother******** and if yall got a problem with it root for the knicks... im sure they can afford to have a 14 million dollar cheerleader on the becnch for two seasons... then go out in the offseason and find someone else to pay as well.

                        doesn't work like that for the Indiana Pacers... you cant just let guys like Danny and Lance walk without at least attempting to get some kind of return on investment.

                        its a BS excuse this team cant win without Danny,, when they have proven so they can with the talent Bird has assembled.


                        hell peyton ******** manning didn't even get this kind of respect when he was cut loose by the colts. listen,, I appreciate Danny Granger but yall gotta get a grip.. Danny Granger is not the same player he once was... and his upcoming contract this offeseason will further validate Birds decision to move forward without DG.

                        Bird doesn't have to take responsibility for **** except saving this Franchise from moving to Vegas and building a cellar dweller into an NBA contender. Let him run the show and everyone else needs to **** if they don't like it.

                        Comment


                        • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                          Originally posted by Really? View Post
                          I guess it should be said that this season should have been one that someone stepped up to be a LEADER, but it does not seem like that has happened, all we can do is hope that it happens during the playoffs. To me what makes a good leader is followers that respect and listen to him, doesn't have to be how many years he has been on the team, but more about his composure and and ability to make others believe in him. I think people wanted PG to turn into this but he has not yet and maybe never will, so where do we go from here?
                          PG's 23 years old and trying to live up to the hype, anyone that expected him to be any kind of "leader" is kind of naive honestly. Dude's still on his rookie deal, asking him to carry the offensive load for a contender is more than enough, let alone leading a locker room. To put it in perspective, Paul George is like 19 months older than AJ Hammons.

                          Comment


                          • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                            Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                            well lets see PGs play significantly declined.. think knocking up a stripper may have more to do with that than DG leaving the pacers.

                            I cant believe were still debating this same tired *** topic. Grangers not gonna get paid **** in FA. maybe 2.5 million at most for 2 seasons. Evan Turner will likely receive MLE and Allen approx. the same as Granger.

                            imo that indicates Bird did what was best for the Franchise. Were a small market media,,, cant pay players 14 million two seasons in a row to cheerlead off the bench. If Danny was playing well he would not have gotten traded to begin with. Were not discussing the same DG from 2012 series.

                            If Danny Grangers so darn vital to this teams success purely based on lockerroom leadership than DWEST and GHILL are not doing their jobs. With Hill that's likely very true.

                            Im sure there is a shred of truth to the DG trade impacting the team but not 2 months later. at some point the players have to take responsibility and be held accountable.

                            I doubt anyone offers Granger more than 2.5 million,, the reason why you ask.... because he no longer the same player he once was. When are people going to stop living in fantasy land and under the notion Grangers 7 points off the bench was the reason for this teams decline.

                            How bout pinpointing the real reason.. the offense sucks. how in gods green earth was danny going to make any difference at all??? and that's working under the assumption that Danny actually stayed healthy enuff to stay on the court... which facts are facts he is not playing and may not for the clippers.

                            danny or evan doesn't matter,, the second unit has been bad all season... if that's the case I would still prefer the trade because the pacers actually got two players that are healthy, young and can contribute beyond this season.

                            We are a small market franchise... keeping danny for sentimental reasons alone and not evaluating his on the court production is ridiculous.


                            I guarantee most of the ones on here still *****ing about the DG trade would not be willing to offer DG the same contract that Copeland received this offseason.

                            face it... all signs point to Dannys best days behind him. its unfortunate but the guy has 70 million so I think he will be alright.


                            its simply absurd to suggest the only reason this team won 49 games and advanced to the ECF was because Granger was in the lockerroom... and that it has nothing to do with actual talent on the court. Team won without Granger for the past two seasons... yet without Danny in the lockerroom were a .500 team.

                            makes no ******** sense and just tired of hearing the ill conceived fallicies this board continues to dream up in regards to DG.


                            Bird put this team together that has won 55 games and is now considered a title contender. Let him run the mother******** and if yall got a problem with it root for the knicks... im sure they can afford to have a 14 million dollar cheerleader on the becnch for two seasons... then go out in the offseason and find someone else to pay as well.

                            doesn't work like that for the Indiana Pacers... you cant just let guys like Danny and Lance walk without at least attempting to get some kind of return on investment.

                            its a BS excuse this team cant win without Danny,, when they have proven so they can with the talent Bird has assembled.


                            hell peyton ******** manning didn't even get this kind of respect when he was cut loose by the colts. listen,, I appreciate Danny Granger but yall gotta get a grip.. Danny Granger is not the same player he once was... and his upcoming contract this offeseason will further validate Birds decision to move forward without DG.

                            Bird doesn't have to take responsibility for **** except saving this Franchise from moving to Vegas and building a cellar dweller into an NBA contender. Let him run the show and everyone else needs to **** if they don't like it.
                            Sigh. I expected this rant to be honest, PacersPride. I was absolutely sure that you weren't going to let anyone say anything negative about Bird but I had to do it. Why you ask?

                            WIN AS A TEAM, LOSE AS A TEAM!

                            It's that ****ing simple! You cannot tell me that there is even a single person in the team that has to be absolved of any blame. Everyone deserves even the smallest amount of blame. Every.Single.One.

                            I'm not going to dissect your whole post and answer point by point because frankly most of the things you have written do not apply to me. I don't care about the NFL, I haven't voiced an opinion on Danny's next contract, I never said that the only reason that this team went to the ECF last season was because Danny was in the locker room, I never said that the trade is the only reason that we're struggling and I have never ever disagreed with Bird's moves in the past.

                            I was fine with this trade either and frankly I still don't have a big problem with it (although, I do miss Danny, that much is true). I just believe that when a team is struggling then everyone should receive part of the blame. That's all there is to it. Everyone deserved praise when we were playing so good and everyone should receive blame when we aren't playing good. I don't know how I can make my opinion any clearer than that.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              Sigh. I expected this rant to be honest, PacersPride. I was absolutely sure that you weren't going to let anyone say anything negative about Bird but I had to do it. Why you ask?

                              WIN AS A TEAM, LOSE AS A TEAM!

                              It's that ****ing simple! You cannot tell me that there is even a single person in the team that has to be absolved of any blame. Everyone deserves even the smallest amount of blame. Every.Single.One.

                              I'm not going to dissect your whole post and answer point by point because frankly most of the things you have written do not apply to me. I don't care about the NFL, I haven't voiced an opinion on Danny's next contract, I never said that the only reason that this team went to the ECF last season was because Danny was in the locker room, I never said that the trade is the only reason that we're struggling and I have never ever disagreed with Bird's moves in the past.

                              I was fine with this trade either and frankly I still don't have a big problem with it (although, I do miss Danny, that much is true). I just believe that when a team is struggling then everyone should receive part of the blame. That's all there is to it. Everyone deserved praise when we were playing so good and everyone should receive blame when we aren't playing good. I don't know how I can make my opinion any clearer than that.

                              Win as a team lose as a team is a great quote and all but doenst necessarily apply here. If the Pacers get bounced from the postseason what do you believe will inconceivably become the # 1 reason on PD the pacers failed.

                              It will be the DG trade. Hands down. It will be discussed ad nausem on PD in the same ilk as Bird not firing Obrien sooner and finding a coach with players like murphy, Dunleavy, and other garbage excluding DG still on the roster. yet there were zero quality coaches that would have wanted the job (reference SVG) prior to the Pacers having the cap space to make a splash in FA ( DWEST) and young players like (PG, Lance, Roy) developing.

                              You speak of players reading these boards,,, I believe all those scapegoating the DG trade as a valid reason for this teams slide only prohibits letting the players currently in the lockerroom who have won 50 plus games the past two season off the hook, and not to be held accountable for the play on the court.

                              I can see a minimal impact on the team with the DG trade but not two months later going into the postseason... and it certainly should not be considered the #1 reason for this teams slide AND BE FOUND IN EVER ******** THREAD ON PD. SERIOULSY CAN WE JUST GET A DG FAILED TRADE THREAD ALREADY SO I DONT READ THIS EVERY THREAD!!!!!

                              what happens if the trade works out... still plenty of season left... what if Turner helps this team in the postseason... then what???? is it all of a sudden a good trade or will all still be bickering because of the desire for a danny granger lovefest.

                              what I think many miss is that were trying to beat the TWO TIME DEFENDING CHAMPIONS MIAMI HEAT. there is no guarantee Dannys health will allow him to contribute to this teams success... and im sorry but I don't buy the lockerroom influence he has is so strong that his on the court production is irrelevant.

                              To beat the Heat you gotta have all the talent you can find. What happens if we have a big go out with foul trouble... Levoy Allen can help as well... its like all people look at is Evan or Granger,,, when its Evan and Lavoy.

                              As far as the points I made in my "rant" I belive they do apply directly to you and anyone that is a Pacers fan.

                              1) PG struggles due to off court issues???? Not even discussed on these boards.. its all the DG trade #1 reason for failure right????

                              2) Indiana Pacers as a small market franchise... you think letting Granger walk for nothing is good for business??? If not, then why are you above discussing what Grangers market value is going to be this offseason,,, I venture to say its minimal. I don't expect to ever see the 2012 East semis Granger again. Hope im wrong.

                              3) The offense is bad. the bench production is bad. A healthy DG resolves that issue, but as stated above this is not the same DG from the east 2012 semis and anyone that believes that is only fooling themselves.

                              How does Granger have any impact on our woeful offense at 7 pts a game standing in the corner pocket for 3 shooting 36%.

                              4) Granger offered no value this offseason. In that respect this trade has yet to be proven a failure,,, in addition to still having the postseason... I hope all who are so critical of the DG trade own it if Turner and Allen contribute to this team succeeding in the playoffs.


                              5) Pacers won 49 games and advanced to the ECF last season without DG (excluding 5 games). Pacers begun the season 20-4 I believe it was without Danny on the court. Pacers were 8-6 prior to the trade with Danny on the court. The cold hard truth is the hope that Danny offered as a weapon off the bench was very minimal and did not meet expectations or hopes weve had the past season and half (check the DG 2013-2014 thread). In fact, Lance wasn't even looking Dannys way at all. Dannys impact albeit still present is not what it once was. Not when your producting 7 pts on 36% shooting from the floor.


                              But please PD.. carry on continuing to believe the DG trade is the #1 reason this team has played .500 ball the past two months... and lets hear about it in every thread... its very enjoyable!

                              its silly to consider Shaws influence, PGs off court issues, Roys lack of effort, GHILLs passivity, Vogels stubbornness to not maximize the talent on the roster and/or lack of solid offensive design, as valid reasons for the pacers demise the past two months. nope... all was lost when we traded our 7pt 36% shooter to the west coast for two much younger players.

                              makes all the sense to me now in the world. thanks for helping me see the light.

                              Comment


                              • Re: This should be interesting.... (Channel 6 to air Larry Bird "State of the Pacers" interview before NBA Countdown tomorrow)

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                Win as a team lose as a team is a great quote and all but doenst necessarily apply here.
                                It absolutely applies in this case, imo. You are free to disagree with me but my opinion on this subject won't change. Win as a team, lose as a team it is.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                If the Pacers get bounced from the postseason what do you believe will inconceivably become the # 1 reason on PD the pacers failed.

                                It will be the DG trade. Hands down. It will be discussed ad nausem on PD in the same ilk as Bird not firing Obrien sooner and finding a coach with players like murphy, Dunleavy, and other garbage excluding DG still on the roster. yet there were zero quality coaches that would have wanted the job (reference SVG) prior to the Pacers having the cap space to make a splash in FA ( DWEST) and young players like (PG, Lance, Roy) developing.
                                No, it won't be the DG trade. There is only a small minority that mentions the DG trade. People are going to blame it on a lot of things but the majority will be directed towards to our players and Frank.

                                We already have people asking for Frank's head if we don't win the title and others that call our players "pussies". I assure you that Larry Bird will get away from it unscathed compared to everyone else.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                You speak of players reading these boards,,, I believe all those scapegoating the DG trade as a valid reason for this teams slide only prohibits letting the players currently in the lockerroom who have won 50 plus games the past two season off the hook, and not to be held accountable for the play on the court.
                                Players are getting accountable for their play every single game. The same applies for the coach and his staff. [u]Everyone is getting accountable[/b] except from Larry Bird. How is that fair?

                                That's the only thing I'm saying. Wouldn't it be more fair if everyone accepted a part of the responsibility and moved on as a team?

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                I can see a minimal impact on the team with the DG trade but not two months later going into the postseason... and it certainly should not be considered the #1 reason for this teams slide AND BE FOUND IN EVER ******** THREAD ON PD. SERIOULSY CAN WE JUST GET A DG FAILED TRADE THREAD ALREADY SO I DONT READ THIS EVERY THREAD!!!!!
                                No one is saying that it's the #1 reason. People are just saying that it is one of the reasons.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                what happens if the trade works out... still plenty of season left... what if Turner helps this team in the postseason... then what???? is it all of a sudden a good trade or will all still be bickering because of the desire for a danny granger lovefest.
                                I'll start by making my position clear once again. When the trade happened I considered it a good trade. I was sad that Danny was traded (and I wasn't happy that we didn't give him a chance to contend with this group) but the trade was good talent-wise and I agreed with the rationale behind it.

                                I still consider it a good trade, right now. It just hasn't panned out yet and may have contributed to our chemistry issues. That's all.

                                I really, really wish that it pans out in the playoffs. I would be very happy if that happened

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                what I think many miss is that were trying to beat the TWO TIME DEFENDING CHAMPIONS MIAMI HEAT.
                                We're trying to beat the Heat or we're trying to win a title? Don't focus on the tree and lose sight of the forest. The Heat are one of the teams that we will have to beat in our quest for a title. They aren't the only one.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                there is no guarantee Dannys health will allow him to contribute to this teams success... and im sorry but I don't buy the lockerroom influence he has is so strong that his on the court production is irrelevant.
                                Do you consider it a coincidence that the team started struggling after the trade? We were playing amazing ball for the first 3 months of the season and then we suddenly became mediocre. Again, I'm not trying to say that the trade was the primary reason for this but I find it very hard to believe that it isn't related at all. I will only believe it if I hear it from a player's mouth.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                To beat the Heat you gotta have all the talent you can find. What happens if we have a big go out with foul trouble... Levoy Allen can help as well... its like all people look at is Evan or Granger,,, when its Evan and Lavoy.
                                Yes, LaVoy can certainly help. Evan can help as well. I'm really happy that we have those two guys with the team. I don't have any problem at all with them.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                As far as the points I made in my "rant" I belive they do apply directly to you and anyone that is a Pacers fan.
                                I apologize if the usage of the word "rant" insulted you. Insulting you was never the aim of my post and if you felt insulted then I'm sincerely sorry for that. I just wanted to say that I expected this long post out of you since I do remember your stance on Bird. I remember your brave bets about him and your confidence that with him we would become a top team in 3 years.

                                Don't get me wrong, I absolutely believe in Bird. I just believe that everyone should accept part of the responsibility. That's all.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                1) PG struggles due to off court issues???? Not even discussed on these boards.. its all the DG trade #1 reason for failure right????
                                Again, I'm not saying that the trade is the #1 reason for our struggles.

                                The incident with the mother of his baby happened during the off-season. That's when he was in Miami and met with her. I'm sure that learning that he could become father came as a shock to him and it is probable that it influenced his personal play but I find it quite hard to believe that this called chemistry issues throughout the starting 5. It's the same with the selfie incident. It doesn't explain the whole team.

                                And that's the main thing, my friend. Sure, I could see how those incidents could influence PG's play. But that doesn't explain the whole team. It doesn't explain Roy, it doesn't explain West, it doesn't explain Lance, it doesn't explain Hill.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                2) Indiana Pacers as a small market franchise... you think letting Granger walk for nothing is good for business??? If not, then why are you above discussing what Grangers market value is going to be this offseason,,, I venture to say its minimal. I don't expect to ever see the 2012 East semis Granger again. Hope im wrong.
                                I didn't say that I'm above discussing Granger's market value. I just said that I haven't offered an opinion yet because I have not involved myself with these talks. Frankly, I don't know what kind of a contract could Danny get. Everything is going to depend on how he performs in the playoffs.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                3) The offense is bad. the bench production is bad. A healthy DG resolves that issue, but as stated above this is not the same DG from the east 2012 semis and anyone that believes that is only fooling themselves.
                                The offense is bad now but it wasn't bad at the start of the season. It was slightly above average. Frankly, I don't think that this team with this personnel is ever gonna have a top 5 offense. Being above average offensively is good enough for us just like it was good enough for the '04 Pistons.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                How does Granger have any impact on our woeful offense at 7 pts a game standing in the corner pocket for 3 shooting 36%.
                                It would impact our offense the same way that Turner does right now. In other words, it wouldn't impact it a lot because the problem is not the bench.

                                The problem is that the starters went from dominant to mediocre. That's the source of our struggles. And yes, I certainly believe that having a player that the team viewed as a captain would help them stay the course.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                4) Granger offered no value this offseason. In that respect this trade has yet to be proven a failure,,, in addition to still having the postseason... I hope all who are so critical of the DG trade own it if Turner and Allen contribute to this team succeeding in the playoffs.
                                I'll say it for another time yet. I'm not critical of the trade. I have absolutely nothing against the trade itself and I support both Evan and Allen and want to see them do well.

                                I just want to see Bird accept a part of the blame if his trade doesn't pan out (which it hasn't at the moment but this could obviously change in the playoffs). That's all.

                                Remember, Bird was the first member of the Pacers that pointed fingers and he openly discredited Frank in the media. If he is free to criticize others then he should accept some criticism himself as well.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                5) Pacers won 49 games and advanced to the ECF last season without DG (excluding 5 games).
                                True but Danny was still in the locker room. Paul George is on record saying that Danny adviced him on tons of things during the course of the season and helped him a lot.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                Pacers begun the season 20-4 I believe it was without Danny on the court. Pacers were 8-6 prior to the trade with Danny on the court. The cold hard truth is the hope that Danny offered as a weapon off the bench was very minimal and did not meet expectations or hopes weve had the past season and half (check the DG 2013-2014 thread). In fact, Lance wasn't even looking Dannys way at all. Dannys impact albeit still present is not what it once was. Not when your producting 7 pts on 36% shooting from the floor.
                                That's not the cold hard truth, my friend.

                                Take a look at what the numbers say:

                                Indiana Pacers without Granger at the beginning of the season: 20-5

                                Indiana Pacers with Granger: 21-8

                                Indiana Pacers after the trade: 14-13

                                That's the cold hard truth!

                                You also mentioned personal numbers so let's take a look at them as well:

                                13-14 Danny Granger as a Pacer: 8.3 PPG, 3.6 RPG, 1.1 APG on 35.9% shooting.

                                13014 Evan Turner as a Pacer: 6.8 PPG, 3 RPG, 2.2 APG on 39.7% shooting.

                                Neither player has had a big impact and that's mainly because we never used them like we should.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                But please PD.. carry on continuing to believe the DG trade is the #1 reason this team has played .500 ball the past two months... and lets hear about it in every thread... its very enjoyable!
                                I could say the same thing about the player bashing that happens in every single thread.

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                its silly to consider Shaws influence, PGs off court issues, Roys lack of effort, GHILLs passivity, Vogels stubbornness to not maximize the talent on the roster and/or lack of solid offensive design, as valid reasons for the pacers demise the past two months. nope... all was lost when we traded our 7pt 36% shooter to the west coast for two much younger players.
                                No one said that those aren't possible reasons as well. Everything counts. I have never said that the trade was the #1 reason. All I did was to say that it was one of the reasons.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X