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

NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

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

  • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    Christ....I'm so sick of reading how people want the team to tank for lottery picks. This is not retooling or tanking process. It's a "Get talent/players that fits Nate's perceived coaching style, and see how the **** they're going to play together next season." process. To me, the Pacers are basically building a new team from ground zero, but don't know what identity they want for the team.

    Turner and Stephenson (assuming he truly matured) are the new de-facto leaders of the team, while Turner is the new face of the franchise.

    VO and Sabonis our obviously our long-term, already on long contracts future talent. It bugs to me death how people KEEP complaining about VO's contract when we would had to pay PG considerably more if he stayed, or pay whatever to a traded player (Bradley) when he became a FA. VO, Sabonis, and Turner represent a core that you can groom for the next 4 years ala Baby Pacers.

    Monta is gone, because Indiana doesn't want the bad influence around the young players.

    GR3 will have the green light to be better than he was last year, so there's no need to chase the Ottos, Hardaways, Crabbes, etc. of the world.

    The draft picks show that Indiana wants to be versatile in the frontcourt. They want to be able to play "small-ball" with TRUE stretch 4's instead SFs playing out of positions (Leaf, Young, Sabonis), or going "big" with bruisers (Kevin and Ike).

    Darren is just a damn warm body to play PG during the season. His signing shows NOTHING about the Pacers' future long-term plans.

    People want to trade Young and Jefferson, but ****....if you want to tank, does it really ****ing matter if they're on the team? They're solid players, and (from the outside looking in) professionals. They could teach the young players something of value about work ethics, professionalism, etc. If it were up to me, I would sign CJ Miles on that alone. Also, you can have TOO MUCH young talent on a team. You do need vets to stabilize the roster somewhat. The Michigan Fab 5 doesn't exist in the NBA.

    This season is going to about throwing wet noodles at the wall and seeing what sticks, and making additional adjustments on the fly. Nothing more, nothing less. To those of you who are expecting a Nets/76ers type season, you all are about to be seriously disappointed.
    Also, for those that want to tank, I did a little research.

    The Pacers have had the #2 pick 3 time in the NBA. They selected Steve Stipanovich, Wayman Tisdale and Rik Smits. All were good players but none were players to build a franchise around.

    They have also selected Paul George at #10, Reggie Miller and Myles Turner at #11 and Dale Davis at #13. It seems to me like the best move the Pacers could make would be to try and field a fairly competitive team that will be in the playoff hunt until the last week or two of the season and wind up with around the #10 pick overall.

    Comment


    • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      Is the salary floor calculated on a week-by-week basis during the season or is it like the LT and calculated on June 30? If the latter, there is absolutely no reson to spend it just for the sake of spending it.
      Like the luxury tax, last game of regular season. I think it was Memphis that, a few years go, was happily signing heaps of guys by the last week fo the season.

      Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
      The Spurs look loaded at SF.

      Leonard, Gay, Simmons and Anderson.

      Anderson would be nice if we could somehow pry him away.
      I think the point of Gay's acquisition is to give them a small-ball line-up with Aldridge at the 5. Slot him in and suddenly they have scorers/shooters and great length all over the frontcourt. I like it quite a bit on paper; it remains to be seen how much of a toll has the injury taken on Gay, if any.

      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
      No one wants to make a deal with Ainge LOL

      Hope every team holds the line and no one gives up a first for Crowder/Bradley/Smart. Crowder is easily the most valuable because of his contract, so I think someone will bend in the end. But it will probably be a 20s pick from a strong team.
      That would be an uninspiring return for Crowder. Ainge should prioritize keeping Crowder; likely the best contract in the NBA now that Curry got paid (besides rookies and superstars), able to defend 3 positions and for all practical effects the team's second best big man as of now. Ultimately there's no good reason to trade away any of those players if no decent offers come up, but while Bradley/Smart should eventually be traded at some point during the season, I hope Ainge is asking for a king's ransom for Crowder.

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      I'm just correcting you.

      But Ainge didn't get the player that could have put him in the Finals. That's Butler and PG. If he was aggressive instead of posturing and/or hoarding assets he'd have another star.

      Unless you really believe every GM is just too stupid to take the best deal.
      The problem, as Wage noted, is that Ainge would need to give away a couple of valuable high-end role-players, which by itself would diminish the team's chances of winning the title next season. The team would be top-4 heavy, have a decent 5th man, but then rely mostly on young players and minimum salary guys to do the job off the bench. While also giving away a premium asset. And all this for what would likely be one season of Paul George.



      Originally posted by Wage View Post
      Honestly, the Celtics not having any bad contracts kind of hurt our ability to be good trade partners. They were going to have to ship out 2 starters, which they were going to value far more than a rebuilding team. So when they are sending out Crowder and Bradley, to them they have already sent a ton, but to us it's like "ok, that is the salary match, now lets talk assets."
      Yeps. That issue per se could be solved by sending Bradley/Crowder to San Antonio, Houston, OKC, etc, in a 3-way deal. The trouble would still be that Boston wouldn't have much to replace them as roleplayers though.


      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      When you mentioned Slo-Mo (Kyle Anderson) it made me wonder if the team is high on Niang and getting him some minutes at the 3 this year.

      Man, we will easily have the worst wing rotation in the league. Like it won't even be close.
      Slim pickings though. Maybe Ian Clark is worth a gamble. I'd try to pry Alan Williams away from Phoenix, RFA policy notwithstanding, at worst he could be Turner's backup and maybe a MLE-level salary would be too much for the Suns. I think he can blossom into a pretty good starter in some time - terrific screener and roll man (his p'n'r game with Tyler Ulis was pretty deadly last season, even for good defensive teams), elite rebounder, moves his feet well. Pritchard loves to have guys who can get off shots at every position, so I doubt he's looking at Williams. Other than that, perhaps best to just keep it open. Add a minimum salaried veteran plus some D-League kid and let the Oladipo/GRIII/Stephenson rotation swim or sink.

      Comment


      • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

        ....and Boston threw a 2019 2nd round pick our way. Hilarious.

        keep in mind, we acquired Marcus Morris from Phoenix for a 2020 2nd rounder to begin with

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

          Right now as designed, this team is tanking, like it or not! Now what KP does from here on out will give us more direction. But this team sucks atm.
          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

          Comment


          • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            Marcus is a poor man's Jae Crowder. Crowder is a 3 and D guy that tries to do too much. Marcus is a 3 and D guy that doesn't do either one well, yet still tries to do too much. He's a little cheaper but holy mother of god is he nowhere near as good as Avery Bradley.


            I really, really can't stand Marcus. Never could. That ******* called a team meeting to demand more touches. He was the only guy on the team I loathed more than KCP. Hopefully this kills two birds with one stone.

            I'm shocked by this deal. Absolutely shocked. Bradley is a really good player. I thought he'd be the least guy Ainge would want to get rid of. Marcus I would have been happy trading for a conditional 2056 2nd rounder. I just wanted his ****** attitude off the team.
            I agree. Avery Bradley is a better player and teammate than Morriss. Boston should have gotten more for him. Shoot if the blood wasn't bad I can see us trading Thad for him. While Morris is only making 5 million for the next 4 years, they could have gotten a better teammate in Thad.

            Comment


            • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Bradley is nice, a really good role player. But they weren't going to pay him in the summer, and apparently wanted more size and versatility.

              I know you hate Morris, but he has shown to be a pretty good scorer. Put him in that system in Boston and I'd bet his defense looks better than it did in Detroit.

              The reason I like the trade is that it fills a need for both teams. You guys get shooting. Boston gets size and scoring.
              More importantly, it puts them over 30mil under the cap so they can sign GH and not gut their team

              Comment


              • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                Culture changes a player. Not too worried about the deal. AB was gone next year unfortunately and a deal had to be done.

                Comment


                • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                  I cannot understand why people make so many negative assumptions. This post highlights what so many think based on nothing...

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  Christ....I'm so sick of reading how people want the team to tank for lottery picks. This is not retooling or tanking process. It's a "Get talent/players that fits Nate's perceived coaching style, and see how the **** they're going to play together next season." process. To me, the Pacers are basically building a new team from ground zero, but don't know what identity they want for the team.
                  "Building a team from ground zero" usually results in tanking for lottery picks. How can a team have an identity without enough long-term players to build around? What identity do you think we should have? How do you know the identity or plan isn't "Lets see what Myles as the feature guy, Dipo, Sabonis, Leaf and GRIII can do then we know how to build this team."

                  Our identity should be a team that plays hard, and I think we have players to do that.

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  Turner and Stephenson (assuming he truly matured) are the new de-facto leaders of the team, while Turner is the new face of the franchise.

                  VO and Sabonis our obviously our long-term, already on long contracts future talent. It bugs to me death how people KEEP complaining about VO's contract when we would had to pay PG considerably more if he stayed, or pay whatever to a traded player (Bradley) when he became a FA. VO, Sabonis, and Turner represent a core that you can groom for the next 4 years ala Baby Pacers.

                  Monta is gone, because Indiana doesn't want the bad influence around the young players.

                  GR3 will have the green light to be better than he was last year, so there's no need to chase the Ottos, Hardaways, Crabbes, etc. of the world.

                  The draft picks show that Indiana wants to be versatile in the frontcourt. They want to be able to play "small-ball" with TRUE stretch 4's instead SFs playing out of positions (Leaf, Young, Sabonis), or going "big" with bruisers (Kevin and Ike).
                  You just highlighted a plan and identity.

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  People want to trade Young and Jefferson, but ****....if you want to tank, does it really ****ing matter if they're on the team? They're solid players, and (from the outside looking in) professionals. They could teach the young players something of value about work ethics, professionalism, etc. If it were up to me, I would sign CJ Miles on that alone. Also, you can have TOO MUCH young talent on a team. You do need vets to stabilize the roster somewhat. The Michigan Fab 5 doesn't exist in the NBA.
                  People want to move those guy to net picks. If you move Thad for a pick, whose to say you don't net a pick and a vet to "teach the young players" as you say?

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  This season is going to about throwing wet noodles at the wall and seeing what sticks, and making additional adjustments on the fly. Nothing more, nothing less. To those of you who are expecting a Nets/76ers type season, you all are about to be seriously disappointed.
                  I don't think so. I think either we go for a trade for someone like LMA or we just keep young and/or cheap deals and collect assets....


                  Comment


                  • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                    Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                    Alan Williams away from Phoenix
                    Totally forgot about him. He would be my player over Willie Reed and J. Green.

                    Comment


                    • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                      Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                      The problem, as Wage noted, is that Ainge would need to give away a couple of valuable high-end role-players, which by itself would diminish the team's chances of winning the title next season. The team would be top-4 heavy, have a decent 5th man, but then rely mostly on young players and minimum salary guys to do the job off the bench. While also giving away a premium asset. And all this for what would likely be one season of Paul George.
                      I absolutely agree, but I also want to point out again that we can't both say "Ainge clearly didn't want to mortgage his future for one year of PG" and "Why didn't the Pacers hold out for more from the Celtics?" If the former is true, the latter wasn't going to happen. Not directed at you, just in general.

                      ftr, I think you always trade quantity for quality and banners last forever, but I'm not convinced that a newly-assembled Celtics team even with PG and Hayward are better than a GSW team that's had a year to gel already. So if I'm Ainge, I absolutely think my best bet lies in waiting LeBron and Durant out and developing my young guys. However, I also think that Boston is getting to the point where he won't have the minutes to develop all of the young players and future high draft picks they'll have. Personally, I think it would've been a worthwhile gamble for Boston to offer whichever of Brown/Tatum you like less (since you'll have a logjam at SF) and filler to match salaries and see if you can't convince PG to stay. If you can, then you've won the trade.

                      Comment


                      • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                        Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                        The problem, as Wage noted, is that Ainge would need to give away a couple of valuable high-end role-players, which by itself would diminish the team's chances of winning the title next season. The team would be top-4 heavy, have a decent 5th man, but then rely mostly on young players and minimum salary guys to do the job off the bench. While also giving away a premium asset. And all this for what would likely be one season of Paul George.
                        You didn't need to gut. You already gave up Bradley. Smart and Bradly and one of those coveted picks would have got the deal done. And you'd have Paul George instead of Morris and Smart. If you prefer the latter agree to disagree.

                        Comment


                        • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                          Right now as designed, this team is tanking, like it or not! Now what KP does from here on out will give us more direction. But this team sucks atm.
                          They're not tanking...they need to discover who they are as a team.


                          Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                          Comment


                          • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            I know you hate Morris, but he has shown to be a pretty good scorer. Put him in that system in Boston and I'd bet his defense looks better than it did in Detroit.
                            System or not system, the guy is super slow. Can't guard the perimeter at all. He plays 3-4 feet off of the 3 point line because he doesn't have the recovery speed to stay in front of other SFs. Gives up an inordinate amount of threes. Can't defend the PF spot either. Not athletic enough.

                            He was a huge reason why we couldn't beat Indiana. He incessantly talked **** to Paul George and Paul George obliged him and lit his *** up like a Christmas tree. Every time.

                            So sick and tired of watching Marcus give George a 3-foot cushion on the perimeter because he was scared of getting dunked on, and then yapping at him anyway after he made yet another easy 18-footer.
                            Last edited by Kstat; 07-07-2017, 10:52 AM.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                              Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                              I would take Bojan Bogdanovic. I doubt the Wiz can afford him. Or JaMychal Green. Or Gerald Henderson. McAdoo. Bring back Poythress. Willie Reed. Troy Williams off the bench. James Young too.

                              There will be a signing. The situation is what will we pay them and for how long. Any player over 23 should not lock us in over 3 years above 8 million unless it is Bogdanovic or J. Green. To fill out the roster, we need a defensive wing that could develop a better offensive game. Someone that might get open jumpers with our bigs and DC stretching the floor and with Lance/Victor slashing.

                              We need a rebounder in the worse way.

                              The only way we have gotten FA to come here is they want to use our franchise as an oppurtunity to get to the next contract. Whether it be a 30 year old vet wanting money but can't find a contender to spend on him or a young 22-25 who was buried on a bench and thinks they can crack our rotation.

                              West came here after injuring his knee. Boston wanted him, but we had the vets to lure him. We may never get another FA like that again. If you want to follow a team that can attract them I suggest following a different team. We will draft and trade to get quality players, and risk losing them when we don't have the lure that others do. That is the NBA for INDY for the past 30 years and the next 30 years.

                              Poythress and Young weren't much at Kentucky, this comes from a U of K fan, so no thanks to both of them. I'm not impressed with any of those players on that list. I've resigned myself to the fact the Pacers are gonna suck this season like the 32 win seasons of JOB, I can live with this "IF" there is light at the end of the tunnel next season or the season after. Right now the FO needs to acquire some picks for the future and rebuild, no retooling for mediocrity.

                              Comment


                              • Re: NBA 2017 Offseason Thread

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                System or not system, the guy is super slow. Can't guard the perimeter at all. He plays 3-4 feet off of the 3 point line because he doesn't have the recovery speed to stay in front of other SFs. Gives up an inordinate amount of threes. Can't defend the PF spot either. Not athletic enough.

                                He was a huge reason why we couldn't beat Indiana. He incessantly talked **** to Paul George and Paul George obliged him and lit his *** up like a Christmas tree. Every time.
                                Which is why he will be utikized as a bench scorer.

                                I always looked at Marcus as Al Harrington lite. His best role is an off the bench Scorer that can get hot. No more, no less.

                                You are right about the PG thing. Paul lit his *** up every time lol

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X