Pacers.com apologist in denial

by bloodsweatndonuts on May 4, 2007 6:30 PM PDT

Weird article. Just basically telling Pacers fans not to be jealous. That's sad.
The only point the article tries to make is that the Warriors didn't benefit as much as we think they did from the trade. Which is dead wrong, especially considering the chemistry and, not coincidentally, the defensive intensity it helped solidify.

Strangely, he also doesn't mention DunMurpy or the massive amount of money they took on. He doesn't even try to go to the "Diogu is the real key to this trade" card. Why do they have to pee on our parade?

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/web_070504.html?rss=true

Without question, Stephen Jackson has been a major contributor. He also was ejected twice (sound familiar?) during the Dallas series - and fined heavily by Coach Don Nelson. Al Harrington, however, hasn't adapted well to being moved to center (sound familiar?) and has slipped to the fringe of the rotation. Sarunas Jasikevicius and Josh Powell rarely shed their warmups.

The fact is, the Pacers probably wouldn't have made the playoffs had they kept the roster intact. Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird accurately identified a dysfunctional team that was teetering on the brink of total collapse and acted to make a major change. If anything, the trade delayed the inevitable because it provided the new energy that led to the only real surge of the season in late January and early February.

Here's a bonus feature on the front page called "Dunleavy, A Breath of Fresh Air".
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/0607_review_dunleavy.html

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

personally....

I don't care who got the better end of the deal. All I care about is that we became a better team because of it. :]

by bradyk2 on May 4, 2007 6:54 PM PDT reply actions

The Wizard of Oz

All I say about the article, especially the "bonus piece" on Dunleavy, is that it reminded me of the Wizard of Oz. By that I mean Dunleavy is still desperately in need of a heart, courage, and in spite of the hype, a basketball IQ brain. I guess Indiana is as close as he could get to Kansas. Good for him; a hella lot better for us. I hope Jr. and Sr. are enjoying the playoffs in their respective abodes.

by commish on May 4, 2007 7:33 PM PDT reply actions

what a joke

theres something called denial, and thats the state the pacers are in right now

by llamalimbo1 on May 4, 2007 7:43 PM PDT reply actions

they didnt take into account

the friendship and chemistry our new team got goin on, nor do they comment on Al's contribution during the season. Of course he will be adjusting to play center, that's not his original position, how did murphy deal with that? c'mon pacers, you guys can write better than that

by ictigoibitties on May 4, 2007 8:03 PM PDT reply actions

BS

dude who made the playoffs and won the last like 9 outta 10 games in the regular season, and who just knocked off the best team in the NBA? my point is made stupid pacer fans and writers, go cry to rik smits.

by LilJay23 on May 4, 2007 8:11 PM PDT reply actions

this guy has had a sip from the fountain of youth

"A no-nonsense player long on fundamentals and unusually skilled for his size, Dunleavy is still young enough (26) that his game has some room for growth."

For any other player, 26 would be considered someones PEAK as far as accumulating skills and development goes. Am I right? Yi, the potential high lottery pick, is considered by many to be TOO old already at 21 or potentially 25 if that is his real age. College seniors at 22-23 are also considered to have reached their ceiling, such as Alando Tucker (sp?) of Wisconsin. I mean, really, what gives? Discussions about age and future development are often contradictory and depend on whos writing a review of a player...but the fact that this guy despite all his inconsistency -- average 2 more points a game while playing close to 8-10 more minutes a game after his trade while his other stats remained still -- is still considered to be developing. Granted, this is off NBA.com so maybe that's why the writer was pleasant, but If it wasn't for his dad, my impression is he would be getting slammed A LOT more

by dj fuzzylogic on May 4, 2007 8:14 PM PDT reply actions

You gotta be in denial...

when the Warriors are in the Playoffs and the Pacers are not. Not to mention the contracts of Murphleavy... the pacers are screwed for years to come. They had to lie to the fans(new energy from DUNothing? ...hahahah) or else, the Pacers would be in anarchy, and they would go after Larry Bird's head.

by MVP @ Golden State Of Mind on May 4, 2007 8:58 PM PDT reply actions

Hahaha

I'm just laughing cause they aren't our problem anymore. It's shallow analysis plus that river in Africa.

by Atma Brother ONE on May 4, 2007 10:48 PM PDT reply actions

At least get the basic facts right...

The W's were never 26-36, and they went 15-5 over the last 20.

by sfshark on May 4, 2007 11:03 PM PDT reply actions

The

Pacers would have been better off trading for a group of middle schoolers than taking on Murphleavy and their disgusting contracts.

by J Rich 4 MVP on May 5, 2007 1:25 AM PDT reply actions

funny thing is you're right

cuz it's much better to have nothing than to have a bad contract. Look at the Bobcats, they do nothing but draft players every year, and probably 2/3 of the league wishes they were them because they are so far under the cap (the Bobcats had to trade for Jeff McInnis during the season just because they were UNDER THE MINIMUM salary cap

More Hardware Coming!

by gsw4life on May 5, 2007 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions

I thought Pacers fans

were already booing the MurphLeavy tandem during the 10 game or so losing streak during playoff positioning time that put a nail in their season's coffin.

Al hasn't been a major factor in taking out Dallas but Jax has, fines or no fines.

Call a Dunleavy by any other name and he's still a Dunleavy.

by back2back51s on May 5, 2007 1:38 AM PDT reply actions

whether or not

we had made the playoffs, the trade was the right move for us

making the playoffs is the icing

Indy's in deep trouble and I don't care !!!

what's your pleasure, Utah or Houston?

by hardcore on May 5, 2007 9:11 AM PDT reply actions

i think he has a point

they simply just needed to get jackson out of there and harrington wasn't working out as well as they planned. Now i disagree with the statement he said about how even if they didn't make the trade the pacers would have missed the playoffs.

by travisl212 on May 5, 2007 9:35 AM PDT reply actions

ya that's a pretty ridiculous statement

they were like 4th in the conference... they lost 11 games in a row and were STILL 8th seed. He's just bitter

More Hardware Coming!

by gsw4life on May 5, 2007 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions

dunleavy has a "quiet toughness"?!

i guess our ears just weren't sensitive enough.

by 321 IN n OUT on May 5, 2007 10:01 AM PDT reply actions

lol

More Hardware Coming!

by gsw4life on May 5, 2007 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions

FLAT OUR RACISM

I don't care what we're not supposed to say on here, that's FLAT OUR RACISM. I'm glad their true intentions came out after the fact, (they=Indy media).

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on May 5, 2007 11:10 AM PDT reply actions

I probably agree with you, but why?

Why do you think it's racist?

by Atma Brother ONE on May 5, 2007 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions

If I had to explain it to you here...

It means we have a fundamental difference on our basic definitions of racism and how it is a part of American society. So it woulnd't be worth my time to sit here and explain it to you.

If you "probably" agree, what are YOUR reasons? Why do you have to question me while at the same time refusing to explicitly disagree with me? Why can't you just make your own opinion, give your own reasons and THEN ask me for my reason?

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on May 5, 2007 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Ugh

Race baiting at its finest!

Ban?

by GameSix on May 5, 2007 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions

go home

this is America, this is the bay area, I have a right to an opinion, if you think i should be banned for pointing out when I think someone is racist, then you're in the wrong place cuz that will NEVER happen.

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on May 8, 2007 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions

OK

I'm just curious what your reasons are for making that claim. If you have time to post that someone is racist, dumb, etc, then explain why. You're posting that someone is racist is fruitless unless you expose the reasons why.

I didn't think that article in particular was racist, but I do think there are definitely some racist underpinnings in people's take on the trade and on Dunleavy in general.

It means we have a fundamental difference on our basic definitions of racism and how it is a part of American society.

Again you haven't said anything substantial yet, so how can we have this "fundamental difference"?

I'm not saying that the article ISN'T or CAN'T BE racist. I'm just honestly curious why you think so- what are the specific lines in the piece that you think are racist? If you take offense to my curiosity, then well there's nothing I can do about it.

by Atma Brother ONE on May 5, 2007 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions

You're getting real personal right now and it's

pissing me the hell off.

If you have time to post that someone is racist, dumb, etc, then explain why.

I never said anyone was dumb, or etc.

I think you're really trying hard to show me as an extremist and it's not working Atma. Why? Well because after I made a simple argument which you REFUSED to DENY, you go on and start saying I called someone dumb or perhaps something else?

You're really pushing it.

first i'll give you the answer you want.

Based on the performance of our players post-trade, and based on overall consensus in warrior nation and even nba nation, I think it's safe to say that 99.99% of people strongly and truly feel that we WON THAT TRADE because it not only helped our team but fueled us to mesh and finish the season 16-5 against the TOUGHEST schedule in the NBA and subsequently goto the playoffs for the first time in 13 years and THEN make the biggest upset in the history of the NBA playoffs all with our #2 contributor coming from that UNBELIEVABLE robbery of a trade with indiana where we got rid of one horrible player and one underachieving player for 2 solid starters, 1 of whom has been on freaking fire and seriously helped put us where we are today!!!!

SO!!! HAVING SAID THAT ATMA! The only possible reason someone from INDIANA could SERIOUSLY still HATE stephen jackson and be glad he is not on the Pacers, in my opinion, stems from the fact that they had developed a racial bias against him during his tenure with the pacers. Again, this opinion requires fundamental understandings, which I will now elaborate on.

racism exists in america, so does inequality.
racism exists more towards blacks than whites, though it can go either way.
indiana is a more conservative place than california, so stephen jack is more accepted here and is subject to more racism in indiana than here.

so that is my honest opinion!

and i TRULY FEEL that in your HEART you share that opinion and simply wanted to force me to explain it because you wanted to try to make me look bad if i didn't explain it. I've said it time and time again, and i'll say it now, GSOM is way too quick too judge jack and then quickly ignores their judgements when he blows up and is all over sportscenter with fabulous highlights, this stems back from the gun articles you guys had and your refusal to acknowledge some instances where the refs were too judgemental on him. that is MY opinion. and the fact that YOU think you're actually radical, is because you're just too weak to stand on your two feet and stand up for your own views, and are susceptible to some internet conservatives that come on here and bash you everytime you have a socially conscious view on your blog.

oh and ray of lite, there's your explanation, straight of out my hole. (funny how you say i came from a hole, but i'm not the new user on this site, so it's only fitting that in response to you calling me out for coming out of a hole that i call you a BANDWAGON.)

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on May 8, 2007 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions

Wow

You have some serious reading comprehension issues man. I'll leave it at that.

by Atma Brother ONE on May 8, 2007 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions

(shaking head)

all i can say: read between the lines. its evident that you are reading selectively, but that you also don't understand figurative speech.

your logic to how the article is 'racist' is rather simplistic and actually misses the point of how 'racism' operates. just because Indiana thinks Dunleavy is STILL the new hotness doesn't OBVIOUSLY mean its racist. Racism is a larger problem than just fan popularity and jersey sales. Sure it might be part of it, but perhaps the more important question is how this is part of a larger discourse that might impact Jacksons' pending court date. or rather, how is it that Paris Hilton violating probation (getting probation for driving under the influence and violating it for driving under the influence) might get 45 days in prison vs. Eve (the rapper) who hit a center divide (being under the influence) might get 6 months? "racism" is not just anything like these worthless articles commioned by NBA.com but actual acts of violence (physical, mental, etc) that have real consequences on peoples lives--materially.

Proving to us that Jackson is a good player is pointless to us, because 1) we KNOW he's a great player and a leader (i dn't know whyyou think you'd need to tell US that) AND 2) it REDUCES racism (in this case) to just a bunch of generic black-white stereotypes or cultural representations in the real of sports as if they were unconnected to real social life. Racism as a whole is more complicated than merely simplistic conclusions about geographic backwardsness and being subjected to name calling. Perhaps the larger question you might want to think about is how someone of a similar skills set -- who might be black, asian, latino etc. -- wouldn't even be in this league nor would they get a phat contract like dun. that to me seems like a more intriguing question about racism than about just giving jax props.

For someone who talks big about his college education, you really need to go back to school or get involved in some community organizing or something...cuz your analysis is pretty shoddy.

by dj fuzzylogic on May 8, 2007 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions

ok ucsd

i havent really referenced to anything other than defending myself mr. ucsd ucsd all over the damn site. get over YOURSELF buddy before attacking someone without any facts.

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on May 9, 2007 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions

you have just proven again

that you have reading comprehension issues. if you think my response is about dissing UCI, you really have no clue. interestingly you aren't responding to any of my comments and merely throwing paper bullets my way. nice dude. nice.

by dj fuzzylogic on May 11, 2007 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions

Huh?

You pop out of a hole and lob a controversial remark, then don't want to take the time to explain it? And then criticize others for wanting an explanation?
Even if your belief (whatever it is) is completely correct, this isn't the way to engage in a conversation.

by Ray of Lite on May 5, 2007 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions

at it again..

throwing the term "racism" around as if its anything and everything drastically reduces its actual critique. without qualification, people aren't going to take "racism" seriously if those making accusations have no way of actually pinpointing what makes something racist. if you think someone asking you "what's racist about it?" automatically means they're critiquing you or disagreeing or by deferring the question, then you need to check your pedagogy, cuz it ain't working as you can see.

by dj fuzzylogic on May 5, 2007 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions

and also

no one ever said you couldn't say "racism" on this blog. it has never been banned from the GSoM dictionary; that is just your interpretation of our responses.

there are several people on this blog -- some i know more personally than others -- who are committed to anti-racist work in the community, academy, or in their artistic works spend A LOT of time strategizing how to address racism through public policy and through community building. They are savvy in their strategies because they are able to get others of different political lines to buy into their philosophies. if anything, people who's supposedly liberal/radical actions are by yelling "racism" probably piss off those anti-racist laborers because that tactic makes our jobs so much harder because we have to clean up the mess of so-called armchair activists. you think that only yelling 'that's racists' actually automatically convince people with deep seated racisms to want to reconsider their own morality and ethics? You think the civil rights movements and third world liberation movements were premised on yelling "racism!"? if you think history is as uncomplicated than that, you really need to go back to school. better yet, just leave it to those that do it...

by dj fuzzylogic on May 5, 2007 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't CARE

The Pacers could have made the friggin' playoffs and gone to the finals and I WOULDN'T CARE! I am just so so so so so so so happy to be rid of those two dudes. Don't get me wrong, I wish them all the best and everything, but...I just didn't want them on this team anymore.

by chacabuco on May 5, 2007 12:11 PM PDT reply actions