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

Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

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

  • #31
    Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    Ooooo this is a tough one to call. Some of these predictions seem a tad unrealistic, however, lol.... let's not bury the kid before he even takes off.

    I think he's going to be a damned good player in some capacity. The spectacular level of defense he's showing in this series is damn near unmaintainable on a consistent-basis... defense is tough as hell to play from a conditioning standpoint. You will wear - yourself - out playing good D like that. I guess my point is, I don't see him playing D like he's currently putting on Rose *while* dropping 20+ a game. Maybe ever. If we want to see him become a 20+ ppg scorer, the defense is probly gonna drop off, sort of like what Granger's did after hsi first season. I still have to remind people that when Granger came in, it was his defense that had everyone excited, I don't think *anyone* predicted Granger would be a 20+ ppg scorer.... his focus has completely shifted. But regardless, as much as the goofballs want to rain on Granger, that dude has done nothing but exceed expectations since joining the team. 26 ppg? That's nuts from a 17th pick. He averaged 20 ppg this season in an "off year" --- still well above what all the experts (and us fans) predicted from him years ago. If I had asked you 6 years ago if 20/6/3 with not-near-as-bad-as-most-people-act-like defense would be good enough from our SF position, I'm guessing this entire forum would've thrown their hands up eagerly. People forget that when we drafted Granger, we had JO, Artest, Stephen Jackson --- no one would've guess that 3 years later, Granger would be our best player and averaging 27/game. He's been an amazing addition to this team.

    Will PG follow that same path? It's just really tough to play elite-level defense *and* elite-level offense 100% of the time.

    George also shows a lot of raw offensive talent, but he also needs a lot of work in his offensive game. I'm not saying he can't be a 20+ ppg scorer, but he's not even close yet. People calling him TMac and VCarter --- woah. Those guys were way better offensive options in their early years. They weren't near as good defensively, but comparing PG to an early VC *offensively* is.... vinsanity, and if you really wanna compare PG's dunks to Vince Carter's, you better watch some VC highlights. As for TMac, he averaged almost 27 ppg at PG's current age and was damn near the most unstoppable offensive force in the league that year, nothing short of spectacular. PG isn't approaching that yet, lol...

    Think expectations need to be revised. Dreams? Sure, keep those. Can't hurt.
    Really? McGrady was a better offensive option in his rookie year? Well that's just not true at all. Sure McGrady was straight out of high school, but lets not act like Paul came from some big time college program like Carter did. Everyone knows that Paul is raw on the offensive end. But so was McGrady when he came into the league. His rookie year he averaged 7ppg, 4.2rpg, 1.5 apg on 45% shooting. Paul is averaging 7.8ppg, 3.7rpg, 1.1apg on 45% shooting. Seems pretty damn close to me.

    Watching Paul George play, I see a similar skill set and flow to his game in what I saw in Tracy McGrady. Thats not saying he will be Tracy McGrady. I don't think he will ever put up 30ppg. Then again I hope he is never in a position where he has to like McGrady was.

    Oh and T-Mac didn't average 27ppg at Paul's age. He averaged 15.4ppg. Paul is still 20 years old (turns 21 next month). McGrady was also getting 30mpg when he was 20. Was McGrady more polished at 20 than Paul? Yes, of course he was. It was his third year in the NBA. He better look more polished than a rookie.

    McGrady was very raw as a rookie and second year player. Even in his second year he only averaged 9.3ppg, 5.7rpg, 2.3apg on 43% shooting. I think Paul will make a bigger jump from his rookie to his second year than McGrady did. We know he can rebound, we are seeing it in this series. We have seen his passing skills all season long. We see the offensive potential, even though its raw. He is very similar to Tracy McGrady.

    His ball handling needs the most work right now. It's just sloppy at times. It's not like the kid has any fundamental flaws in his game that are saying he can't be as good as Tracy or Vince. His shooting form is very pretty. He has a good sense of the game and has a great fluidity to his game. Oh and add in the fact that he is a complete defensive stud, what isn't there to get excited about this guy.

    If Danny Granger can average 25ppg for a season, I don't see anything in George's game that will hold him back from being able to do that. And that's not a slight at Granger. I love the guy. But how many thought Danny would turn out to be this good? Did anyone? Paul is more gifted than Danny and is showing it in his rookie season. There are things he can do that Danny can't, especially when he was a rookie.

    Paul George is gonna be a very special player for the Indiana Pacers. Many people thought that other tall 2 guard from somewhere in Cali wasn't gonna turn out to be a great player for the Pacers, but Reggie turned out to be pretty special too didn't he?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
      Really? McGrady was a better offensive option in his rookie year? Well that's just not true at all. Sure McGrady was straight out of high school, but lets not act like Paul came from some big time college program like Carter did. Everyone knows that Paul is raw on the offensive end. But so was McGrady when he came into the league. His rookie year he averaged 7ppg, 4.2rpg, 1.5 apg on 45% shooting. Paul is averaging 7.8ppg, 3.7rpg, 1.1apg on 45% shooting. Seems pretty damn close to me.

      Watching Paul George play, I see a similar skill set and flow to his game in what I saw in Tracy McGrady. Thats not saying he will be Tracy McGrady. I don't think he will ever put up 30ppg. Then again I hope he is never in a position where he has to like McGrady was.

      Oh and T-Mac didn't average 27ppg at Paul's age. He averaged 15.4ppg. Paul is still 20 years old (turns 21 next month). McGrady was also getting 30mpg when he was 20. Was McGrady more polished at 20 than Paul? Yes, of course he was. It was his third year in the NBA. He better look more polished than a rookie.

      McGrady was very raw as a rookie and second year player. Even in his second year he only averaged 9.3ppg, 5.7rpg, 2.3apg on 43% shooting. I think Paul will make a bigger jump from his rookie to his second year than McGrady did. We know he can rebound, we are seeing it in this series. We have seen his passing skills all season long. We see the offensive potential, even though its raw. He is very similar to Tracy McGrady.

      His ball handling needs the most work right now. It's just sloppy at times. It's not like the kid has any fundamental flaws in his game that are saying he can't be as good as Tracy or Vince. His shooting form is very pretty. He has a good sense of the game and has a great fluidity to his game. Oh and add in the fact that he is a complete defensive stud, what isn't there to get excited about this guy.

      If Danny Granger can average 25ppg for a season, I don't see anything in George's game that will hold him back from being able to do that. And that's not a slight at Granger. I love the guy. But how many thought Danny would turn out to be this good? Did anyone? Paul is more gifted than Danny and is showing it in his rookie season. There are things he can do that Danny can't, especially when he was a rookie.

      Paul George is gonna be a very special player for the Indiana Pacers. Many people thought that other tall 2 guard from somewhere in Cali wasn't gonna turn out to be a great player for the Pacers, but Reggie turned out to be pretty special too didn't he?
      This is POTY material for me IMO

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

        You act like I'm not a fan? I freakin love Paul George, dude. I'm just not proclaiming him the next TMac or VC. Those are LOFTY expectations. He can still be a great player. If he achieves it --- GREAT. But the kid is 20 years old, and 85% of this forum expects this kid to score 27 pts/game in 3 years. That's a build-up for a big let-down.

        Some of your comments deserve a response though, because you're completely painting me as a doubter of this kid, when I'm raelly doubting the expectations of this forum for Paul George, and you can't blame me.

        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
        Really? McGrady was a better offensive option in his rookie year?
        Read what I wrote again. I never said his rookie year -- I said his early years.

        Well that's just not true at all. Sure McGrady was straight out of high school, but lets not act like Paul came from some big time college program like Carter did. Everyone knows that Paul is raw on the offensive end. But so was McGrady when he came into the league. His rookie year he averaged 7ppg, 4.2rpg, 1.5 apg on 45% shooting. Paul is averaging 7.8ppg, 3.7rpg, 1.1apg on 45% shooting. Seems pretty damn close to me.

        Watching Paul George play, I see a similar skill set and flow to his game in what I saw in Tracy McGrady. Thats not saying he will be Tracy McGrady. I don't think he will ever put up 30ppg. Then again I hope he is never in a position where he has to like McGrady was.
        So you're agreeing with me... and arguing with me? I'm basically saying that expecting TMac numbers from George is putting unneeded expectations on the kid (let him grow into what he's gonna be instead of declaring him the next TMac), and you basicaly tell me I'm wrong, and then agree with me that he's not gonna be the next TMac?? I'm just getting confused...

        Oh and T-Mac didn't average 27ppg at Paul's age.He averaged 15.4ppg. Paul is still 20 years old (turns 21 next month). McGrady was also getting 30mpg when he was 20.
        Oh... gee... my bad. One month and 10 minutes per game difference. Do you see George averaging 27 points/game next year with 10 more minutes? That's what TMac was doing. I don't see that.

        Was McGrady more polished at 20 than Paul? Yes, of course he was. It was his third year in the NBA. He better look more polished than a rookie.
        The straight-outta-high-school argument is completely disregarding the fact that TMac was considered *talented* enough to make the jump from high school to begin with. George is a late-bloomer. People have forgotten what a special talent TMac was. I'm not saying George *isn't* talented... but you need to respect TMac's talent as well. Take a look at his per year increase in the first 3-4 years --- it's astronomical. You guys are basically holding Paul George to one of the most meteoric rises in production in history. 27 pts/game by the age of 20/21 --- that's unbelievable. It's.... unprecedented. You act like it happens all the time. The only person I can recall coming close to that meteoric rise is Lebron james, who shattered it a few years later, when he averaged 31 pts/game at 21. You're talking LeBron James and Tracy McGrady, and saying I'm not reasonable for not expecting the same rise from Paul George?

        McGrady was very raw as a rookie and second year player. Even in his second year he only averaged 9.3ppg, 5.7rpg, 2.3apg on 43% shooting. I think Paul will make a bigger jump from his rookie to his second year than McGrady did. We know he can rebound, we are seeing it in this series. We have seen his passing skills all season long. We see the offensive potential, even though its raw. He is very similar to Tracy McGrady.

        His ball handling needs the most work right now. It's just sloppy at times. It's not like the kid has any fundamental flaws in his game that are saying he can't be as good as Tracy or Vince. His shooting form is very pretty. He has a good sense of the game and has a great fluidity to his game. Oh and add in the fact that he is a complete defensive stud, what isn't there to get excited about this guy.

        If Danny Granger can average 25ppg for a season, I don't see anything in George's game that will hold him back from being able to do that. And that's not a slight at Granger. I love the guy. But how many thought Danny would turn out to be this good? Did anyone? Paul is more gifted than Danny and is showing it in his rookie season. There are things he can do that Danny can't, especially when he was a rookie.

        Paul George is gonna be a very special player for the Indiana Pacers. Many people thought that other tall 2 guard from somewhere in Cali wasn't gonna turn out to be a great player for the Pacers, but Reggie turned out to be pretty special too didn't he?
        Gonna wrap up by saying that you did not take from my post what I intended you to. If you've read any of my posts, you'd know that I love Paul George. I was saying that we're placing some huge unneeded expectations on this kid. I don't think I need to get lambasted just because I didn't come out and say "I think Paul George is gonna average 35 pts/game and 10 rebounds and 5 assists." Come on, man, be realistic.

        I'd be ecstatic if he got us 20 and 6 and 6, which *I* feel is a realistic level for him to reach.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 04-25-2011, 08:53 PM.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

          No, they're not expectations. They are hopes. and thoughts

          I HOPE and THINK that he will average 27 a game one season.

          I EXPECT him to be a stat sheet stuffer, great defender, and good scorer. But not a guy who is a scorer like VC and TMac.

          For example, I hope and think that the Pacers can win 50 games next year. But I don't expect them to; I'm fine with any amount of wins as long as we are seeing steady improvement and making the Playoffs.

          The only way I'd be upset with his play is if he doesn't give it his all, takes plays off, or defers.
          Last edited by BringJackBack; 04-25-2011, 08:58 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

            This thread is a prediction thread, not a hopes thread, lol. I HOPE he wins 8 championships and scores 40/game.
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              You guys are basically holding Paul George to one of the most meteoric rises in production in history. 27 pts/game by the age of 20/21 --- that's unbelievable. It's.... unprecedented.
              Not a single person is doing that. Only thing we are talking about is style of play.

              Darren Collison plays a similar game as Tony Parker. Does that mean that he's as good as him? No.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                I didn’t mean to imply you aren’t a fan, I just simply disagree with what you are saying. Sure they are lofty expectations, but I bet Paul George has higher ones for himself. You may think its too lofty for him, but we do not.

                Now for the rest of the post:

                Ok so you are talking about McGrady’s early years. How is it fair to compare his early YEARS to just Paul’s rookie year? If you are going to make that argument you must at least wait until Paul has a few years under his belt as well. How is it fair to compare years 3 and 4 of McGrady to year one of Paul George? I guarantee McGrady benefited from being in the NBA for 2 years more than Paul did playing at Fresno State. Hence why he was more polished at age 20.

                I never agreed with you. All I said is I don’t see him hitting 30ppg. McGrady was in a position where he needed to score 30ppg. Thats why I said I hope he is never in the position where he needs to score 30ppg. The reasons we compare Paul to Tracy is because of the similarities in their game, not because of the amount of points they will score or assists they will have. We see him being able to attack the basket and shoot from outside, all while having a fluidity similar to Tracy’s game.

                And yes it is your bad because you are completely missing the fact that when Tracy was putting up 27ppg, he was in his 4th year in the league. 4 years. Paul is in his first. I mean thats just unfair to compare, even though McGrady was only a year older. He was able to spend 3 years learning from Vince Carter. Paul has spent one year in the NBA. The age at this point is pointless. Its the NBA experience you need to look at. Do I see George averaging 27ppg in his second year like McGrady did in his fourth? No, no one does. No one say McGrady averaging 27ppg in his second year either. Do I see him doing it in his 4th year? I very well could. I bet PG’s 2nd year looks much more like Mcgrady’s third.

                PG never even had the chance to go straight to the NBA because of the rules. Even if they were the same he wouldn’t have gone straight to the NBA. You are right, at their ages McGrady is more talented than George. But look at the experience. Paul George never played AAU ball even. He played at a smaller school in Fresno state. Tracy McGrady was able to gain way more experience and be better coached in his first two years in the NBA than George ever was in college. Hence why it is unfair to compare them at their ages. Compare them off their NBA experience and then you get a fair comparison and you see how similar they were in the first year.

                McGrady’s talent showed at age 18. Paul George’s showed at 20. I mean if George was a guy who was 24 and in his first season out of North Carolina, then I could see your point. But he’s not. I’m holding Paul to getting to all star status in year 4 of his NBA career. Not by his age. No one else is doing that except you. Why are you so hung up on age rather than NBA experience?

                PG averaging 20, 6 and 6 in his best season is pretty much Danny Granger level ceiling. Paul George is more talented than Granger. Would I be happy if he hit it? Of course. But that’s not his best case scenario, which is what I am arguing. Paul George has the work ethic to be one of those players that actually can reach his best case scenario too. Which is why so many of us have these lofty goals for him. You are fine in expecting what you expect, but people aren’t wrong or being unrealistic when they think he can be a better player than what you think he will be.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                  20, 6, 4, 2, 1.5; and 2 turnovers.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I think he is going to be a great player, but his best skill (defense) is often very difficult to judge by stats

                    I doubt he'll ever score 27 ppg though at least not on a plus .500 team. I just don't see him being a mello or Durant type scorer. I see him more around 20-22 ppg. but he'll be an all around player a two way player who excells more as a defender than an offensive player.
                    While I agree he will most likely be more of a 20-22 ppg scorer, we are talking about his best not his normal. Look at Reggie he was an 18ppg scorer for the majority of his career, but he did have a season of 24ppg. I personally would go with 25ppg being his all-time high instead of 27, but for one season I think it is possible he averages 27.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      Ok so you are talking about McGrady’s early years. How is it fair to compare his early YEARS to just Paul’s rookie year? If you are going to make that argument you must at least wait until Paul has a few years under his belt as well. How is it fair to compare years 3 and 4 of McGrady to year one of Paul George?
                      And my counter point is, how is it fair to assume George will put up McGrady-like numbers after only 1 season? It's a 2-way logic highway. A true comparison can't be made for another 3-4 years, and yet everyone is proclaiming this guy the next TMac, lol...
                      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                        Scottie Pippen
                        {o,o}
                        |)__)
                        -"-"-

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                          17.5ppg, 6.3rpg, 3apg, 0.8 blks, 1.6 stls

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            And my counter point is, how is it fair to assume George will put up McGrady-like numbers after only 1 season? It's a 2-way logic highway. A true comparison can't be made for another 3-4 years, and yet everyone is proclaiming this guy the next TMac, lol...
                            Fans, making predictions on what a player could be? What? NO WAY? I'm not the one comparing their early years. I'm comparing their rookie years and the similarities in their games. Saying George isn't going to be McGrady because McGrady put up huge stats in year 4 and George didn't in year 1 is dumb. Comparing George in year 1 to McGrady in year 1 and sighting similarities in their skill sets is not. You are doing the former, I am doing the latter.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                              Whatever, dude, lol... not gonna argue with ya anymore, you win. Paul George is definitely TMac 2.0 based off one season, my logic is completely wrong, and I'm stupid for not assuming George is gonna average 30/game in 3 years just because Tracy McGrady did.
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Make a prediction: What does Paul George's best season statistically look like?

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                And my counter point is, how is it fair to assume George will put up McGrady-like numbers after only 1 season? It's a 2-way logic highway. A true comparison can't be made for another 3-4 years, and yet everyone is proclaiming this guy the next TMac, lol...
                                Most of these predictions have been pretty tame givent he fact that this is a pacers message board and most of us are at least to some degree "homers".

                                Most people are prediciting like 20-22 and 6 averages, which are good but not outrageous.

                                Danny granger has put up 26-5.5-3 on good percentages before, and I can tell you now that George can do some things with the ball (offensively) that granger isn't capable of doing in his sixth year in the league. If his jumpshot comes along, which given it's beautiful form and proficiency from the midrange already, it should, then there isn't a real reason to believe that given the opportunity he couldn't be just as prolific as granger is on offense. Keep in mind that this thread is not career averages or anything, but the single best statistical season of his career. Mcgrady put up something ridiculous like 33 ppg 6 rebounds and 6 assists or even better one year, even if george averages 25-26 ppg one year that's still not peak mcgrady on offense.
                                Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X