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:
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

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

Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

    This was posted in the Thunderdome section. Given the fact that we actually drafted Paul and T-Bird's astute assessment of him, that he was the guy we should draft, given certain circumstances, I think he not only did a great job of analysis, but in figuring out how effective he could be as a Pacer and why he should have been the guy we picked.

    I hope it's okay for me to repost this for all to see a little easier and discuss, since comments couldn't be made on the original article

    Tbird 2010 draft analysis #7: Paul George

    By thunderbird1245, on June 16th, 2010

    Tonight we continue our study of potential 2010 draftees, focusing now on the sharp shooting forward from Fresno State, Paul George. In previous editions in this year’s series we’ve looked at Greg Monroe, Patrick Patterson, Avery Bradley, Ed Davis, Hassan Whiteside, and Ekpe Udoh….you can find those profiles elsewhere on Pacers digest.
    A big thank you to my friends in the western part of the country who helped provide me with some film of Fresno State, obviously living here in Bloomington Fresno games weren’t readily available to tape. Without all the help from all my spies, this series wouldn’t be nearly as thorough as it is currently.

    George is the first purely wing player that I have chosen to post on here, but a few more are to come in the following days. Contrary to popular belief, I think this is a pretty good wing draft, and really good value can be found in the middle part of the first round or earlier with many of the pure wing players slated to go around that time.
    Without further ado, let’s take an in depth study of Paul George.

    Paul George has a very good basketball body, slender and sleek, which greatly influences how his game has evolved. Checking in at just a shade under 6’9″, he weighs a svelte 214lbs with extremely low body fat. He also has very long arms, with a wingspan almost 7’0″.
    Having just turned 20 years old on May 2. George has plenty of room to grow into his body. Whoever drafts George would be well served to make sure he is well taken care of from a diet and strength standpoint, as he will need a specific program tailored for him in order to add strength and some muscle. George and his agent need to make sure he invests in his body on his own, making sure he eats correctly and grows his body in the proper way.

    Flexibility is going to be a key for George more than adding weight though…I don’t see George developing into some bruising specimen. He needs to get stronger in his core and his legs, and be able to bend more easily than he does currently, as he plays way too upright, especially when he is tired.

    Having said that, I like George’s body structure, and think he clearly is a plus athlete who can compete at this level with the best athletes in the world, especially as he fills out in the next 2-3 years.

    I really like Paul George’s potential as a strong defender at this level. He will have a distinct size and length advantage over most “3′s” in the league, and he shows good potential in being able to use that to really influence an opponents jump shots, forcing them to change their shot to get the ball over his outstretched hands.
    I do have to use the word “potential” in that last paragraph, because on tape George only contests shots as well as he should about 1/2 of the time. When he did it, he was a force defensively, but sometimes he played somewhat conservatively and allowed people to shoot without getting his arms up. He needs more concentration and focus, and he needs a staff that will demand that of him. He clearly has the natural gifts to be a strong defender at the NBA level, but he has to apply those gifts to his play consistently.

    On the ball, George is usually in the right place, trying to do the right thing. He plays too upright in his slide, which gets him off balance against really quick drivers. His legs get stiff and he gets up out of his stance, which is another reason why sometimes guys who are smaller can still shoot over him, as he doesn’t slide balanced enough to lift his hands quickly. Like I mentioned in the first part of this piece, gaining flexibility in his legs will greatly help him become a high level defender, because the raw material is there to work with no question.
    In spurts on tape, you see him really turn it on defensively. When focused on that aspect of his game, he can really anticipate things well, has really quick hands in getting deflections, can block shots when balanced, and has good instincts. When he does that, he looks like a potential defensive stopper, but you didn’t see it all the time on film. I think a large part of this inconsistency was lack of concentration (typical 19 year old stuff) and lack of elite conditioning. At the NBA level, he will both play less minutes and have less responsibility early in his career, so pacing himself shouldn’t be a long term issue. It will be his own responsibility, and that of his head coach and training staff, to make sure he gets in elite condition to play. If he does that, I see no reason why Paul George can’t be a very very good NBA defensive player, capable of guarding a variety of different types.
    He won’t be great at defending guys who run through a million screens, but he will be a potential stopper of guys who just try and go off the dribble. He will be able to influence their shots from the perimeter due to his length, and that length will allow him to play a step further off than most people can, keeping drivers in front of him. He will also be a terrific defender in screen/roll situations, both against the dribbler and the screener.

    I think if Paul George can learn to play lower to the ground with more flexibility, he can be one of the top wing defenders in the league. He won’t be that right away, but by age 22 or 23 he will be, in my judgment.

    Rebounding isn’t the focus of his game, or of any pure wing for that matter, but George still projects to me as an above average rebounder for his position.

    George can flat sky, and he runs the floor very well. He will get transition rebounds, and he will get rebounds above the rim instead of below it. He isn’t an awesome board guy, and sometimes clever/stronger guys can move him right under the rim, causing balls to sail right over his head. Again, better balance and playing in a lower stance while blocking out would solve alot of that.

    Despite not having great technique as a rebound guy, his natural gifts allowed him in college to average over 7 boards a night. Considering that much of his time was spent on the perimeter on both ends, I think that is an impressive number. Now, depending on who he is playing with and who he is guarding, the numbers he averages in the NBA may fluctuate some. But clearly to me he is just too long and too athletic for his position not to be one of the better rebounding wings in the league, especially on a per minute basis.

    On offense, his game was hindered quite a bit I felt by some not very good teammates at Fresno State.
    What George can and cannot do right now both stand out.
    George is an extremely good perimeter shooter. When George actually takes good shots, he is money. Too often for this team he took some bad attempts, when his teammates left him out to dry up against the clock.
    He has great form, a very good high release, and excellent footwork. When he can catch the ball already facing the basket, George is a lethal 3 point shooter from the college line, and I think moving back a little will be absolutely no problem for him. He isn’t quite as good when he has to turn/pivot into his shot, but he still is ok there. But he doesn’t always keep good balance in those situations, so I don’t project him as a guy you’ll want to run off screens to free up. But he will be a great spot up guy in both the halfcourt and in transition.

    George at this moment lacks the ballhandling skills to be an elite alpha dog type wing. He can’t get all the way to the rim and beat the defense and score thru contact….he is likely to lose the ball in traffic or at least be forced to take a tough shot. I don’t view this as likely to change, but he might be able to get slightly better off the dribble when he gets stronger, more experienced, and learns to play lower. His dribble being too high again goes back to his lack of flexibility in his lower body, and his tendency to play too high.

    I do think he can do something many many players can’t though, and that is make a 1 or 2 dribble move and make a mid range jumper. George doesn’t need much space to get his shot off, as his length and high release make him almost unblockable. That means that he will occasionally be able to make a tough shot when your offense breaks down, because he gets off the ground so well and has such strong shooting mechanics. He can do the rocker step and the pull up going in each direction right now. The ability to make a guarded shot is very very handy when playing in big games.
    His ability to shoot can hurt him though too, because it makes him be lazy with the ball too often, and not take the ball to the rim as much as he should. He needs to get a better shot fake, and then get more aggressive in taking the ball to the paint. George hits a high percentage of foul shots, but he needs to get his dribble moves down so he can get to line for easy points. He definitely can be a “lazy shooter” at times too, not getting his knees bent as the ball is coming toward him, instead waiting to do that after he catches it. He is so tall and long that he gets away with it some, but fundamentally just that one improvement in that skill could add so much to his overall game it would be unreal. He is very fast when he catches the ball on the move, but when he catches from a standing position he takes too long to get going and beat his man….as mentioned several times before, learning to play lower would solve this problem and make him an even tougher cover.

    George is going to be a force on an up tempo team, as he has a very good ability to get out and run. Some guys are “lane fillers”, some guys are “creators” and some guys are spot up shooters. George is a nice player because he can both fill a lane and finish (as long as you give it to him late so he doesn’t have to handle it much) with dunks, or he can hang back a bit and hit from long distance. You don’t want George to have to make many decisions on the run with the ball, but he can definitely finish the play in a variety of ways. Some of his dunks are highlight material, and he likely becomes a fan favorite early in his career, and maybe a slam dunk contest potential competitor.

    He isn’t a selfish player at all, in fact he is quite willing to pass. He isn’t creative and he won’t be a drive/dump pass guy, but he will make the extra pass to his teammates in the right spot.

    He also is a very good post feeder I think, though Fresno didn’t have much going on the block this past year. He held the ball high over his head, fed the ball to the correct target hand, dribbled to get angles when he needed to, and did a solid job in feeding the post….which will likely be one of his main roles depending on who drafts him.

    If I were running a team that drafted George, I’d want him to develop some back to the basket skills. Many teams will have match up problems with him, but will be able to get away with putting smaller guys on him occasionally if he doesn’t develop that. He needs to be able to be a post up option for someone if matchups dictate. If he can add that to his game (I’m not sure he can) then he becomes even more of a tough guy to guard.
    The fact that he is very inexperienced, yet shows such skill already, makes me very bullish on him. What he needs more than anything is really really good coaching, and time to develop for a little while.

    So, what do we have in the under the radar, little known Paul George?
    I think we’ve got a really solid player who will be a starter on high quality teams in his career. Maybe not immediately, but very soon. He is well rounded, and can contribute big time in many many ways on both ends of the floor. He can be an elite sharp shooter, and he can be a big time man to man defender. Only a lack of ball handling skills and some fundamentals keeps him from being an All Star, and he still has enough time on his side that he could develop that part of his game as well.

    George offers some potential positional flexibility in the right situation. if you have a team with a big time post presence, you can play George as a small perimeter 4 man if you want to. And he will be able to guard such players all over the league, which is something our Pacers sometimes can’t do well along with many other teams.

    I think he can guard certain 2′s, almost all 3′s, and some 4′s, all at an above average level. And I think he can be an ideal type “sniper” to play on the perimeter in the halfcourt and make big 3 point shots, and he’ll hit transition bombs as well as score as a finisher on the break. He looks like a very valuable player on a very good team, capable of doing alot of different things.

    George fits best on a team with a ball dominant wing or point guard who can drive and pitch the ball to him, an up tempo team where he can run the floor alot, or on a team with a big time post presence where he can space the floor and feed the ball to said player.
    George is actually the ideal type player to put next to a Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Dwayne Wade type…a plus defender who can space and run the floor. He likely won’t end up on a team like that however, nor will he end up with a team with an established post player he’d fit well with, like a Dwight Howard or Yao Ming perhaps.

    He’d also fit well with a team who runs the triangle offense, which wouldn’t ask him to handle the ball as much as some other schemes would.
    George would be a great fit for Chicago at #17, Miami at #18, or Oklahoma City at #21. He also fits well with Milwaukee at #15, Memphis at #12, or New Orleans at #11. I also think he’d be a great fit for the Clippers at #8, playing with Eric Gordon, Baron Davis, and Blake Griffin.

    If the Clippers pass, then George will likely be there for Indiana at #10. How would George fit in Indiana?
    I actually like George quite a bit as you can tell. I think he would be a big upgrade long term over the timid Brandon Rush, and I think in our current system he’d let Indiana play a smaller lineup that would be interesting and hard to guard: Price (or another better PG), Rush, Granger, George, and Hibbert would have alot of strengths as a unit, though not a championship contender by any means. For Indiana, George and Granger could play along side each other in a small lineup, or George could rotate with Danny and Brandon to form a three headed wing tandem that could be set far into the future.

    I think there is a very strong chance that a wing player will be the best player available for Indiana at #10, as I rate this entire class of wings as better than advertised and under appreciated.
    George isn’t a perfect fit, but unless someone unexpected falls, he may very well be the best player available. And if that is the case, I think you take him and be thankful you got a high quality long term impact guy, no matter the criticism you may receive.

    I doubt that Indiana’s front office is as high on George as I am, so I view him as an unlikely selection for us to make and keep. I think Bird and Morway will view his as replicating Danny Granger too much. I think that line of reasoning is idiotic, but that is just me.

    I do however think there is a strong chance George will be a major target to trade up and get for the teams mentioned above. I think George is a great fit for New Orleans right behind us, so teams behind them who want to jump in front of them will have to deal with us. I expect George will be the guy most of them target, so if a deal is to be made for us to move downward Paul George will likely be involved in it. If Chicago does in fact add Lebron James to go with Derrick Rose, George would be an absolute great fit with those 2 guys….I can see the Bulls being the most aggressive of the teams trying to move up to get him. If Miami ends up with Wade and Stoudamire, he’d fit very well with them as well, so the Heat might deal. And Milwaukee would be a great fit as a long term replacement for Michael Redd, so George can play long term with Jennings and Bogut.
    I could be wrong, but I think Paul George will be a major topic of conversation on draft night, especially if he gets past the Clippers….who I really do believe will take him, making that last paragraph moot.

    Who does George compare to?
    Modern comparable: somewhere between Trevor Ariza and Shawn Marion
    Past comparable: Dan Majerle


    Once again, thank you for reading this post, and I look forward to reading the debate that no doubt will follow about Paul George, who along with Greg Monroe is my favorite player I have profiled so far this year.
    I still have many players to follow, so we will have to wait and see what my opinions are when my profile work is complete.
    As always, the above is just my opinion.
    Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

  • #2
    Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

    This space for rent.


    • #3
      Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

      The only thing missing is he can make accurate bullet passes.


      • #4
        Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

        Also I am now of the belief that he has physically grown an inch or two since this came out. He is now definatley taller than Danny standing side by side and is the same size as Solomon Jones.

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


        • #5
          Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

          He's drastically improved since training camp, especially with his overall awareness. He used to not know how to get open, but now he can move without the ball with success. I can't wait to see him in three years.. He'll be something else.


          • #6
            Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

            T-Bird, you have any suggestions for lottery numbers I might use?


            • #7
              Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              Also I am now of the belief that he has physically grown an inch or two since this came out. He is now definatley taller than Danny standing side by side and is the same size as Solomon Jones.
              He looks taller than Hansbrough too.


              • #8
                Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                He looks taller than Hansbrough too.
                I look taller than Hansbrough.


                • #9
                  Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

                  Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                  He's drastically improved since training camp, especially with his overall awareness. He used to not know how to get open, but now he can move without the ball with success. I can't wait to see him in three years.. He'll be something else.
                  Yeah, even from the beginning of the season, you can tell his awareness has gotten much better. I was lukewarm on him at draft time, mainly due to never having seen him and being afraid he was way too raw. Needless to say, I've turned around on that. He is in the infancy of his pro career and is already making strides.

                  T-bird (as usual) hit this one on the head. Someone posted this for me in the game thread last night and I read it then as I was watching the game. I totally agree in T-bird's assessment that PG plays too "upright". He'll learn, and man he could really be something. I am developing Rudy Gay-like hopes for this kid.


                  • #10
                    Re: Thunderbird's analysis of Paul George

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    Yeah, even from the beginning of the season, you can tell his awareness has gotten much better. I was lukewarm on him at draft time, mainly due to never having seen him and being afraid he was way too raw. Needless to say, I've turned around on that. He is in the infancy of his pro career and is already making strides.

                    T-bird (as usual) hit this one on the head. Someone posted this for me in the game thread last night and I read it then as I was watching the game. I totally agree in T-bird's assessment that PG plays too "upright". He'll learn, and man he could really be something. I am developing Rudy Gay-like hopes for this kid.
                    If he turns out like Rudy Gay, that would be awesome.

                    This kid certainly has a high ceiling. He's going to very good if he puts it all together and I think he will.
                    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.