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

RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

    There is only one way Redick fits here - if you take my view that the primary goal should be to keep the core 5 together for 3 more years (at least) and that this will run the RISK of not being able to keep Lance, and then you look at Lance regressing this season which puts a bit more weight against the "he's just about to take off" view, then trading Lance + pick for Redick makes a lot of sense for Indy.

    What that is doing is basically letting Lance go a year earlier than you will have to in exchange to have the extra bench scoring that you need right now. Even when Danny returns the team has a problem with Lance and Green not scoring well at all and not being reliable to recover for the playoffs. Swapping Lance for Redick while also adding DG would definitely seem to be a "over the top" move for the Pacers this season.

    Next year you are without Redick or Lance, and that's a setback, but we've had some signs that maybe OJ can become a solid bench scorer and the FA/trade market in general for those issues is a long way off.

    I agree that Orlando might not have interest in Lance and might be able to get better, but I'd certainly offer it to them as MAStamper suggested.

    You 100% do not trade Danny this year, it makes zero sense. And DWest??? Did people not watch the Utah game where he was the main defensive stopper for the critical parts of the game. All the insider comments are what a key piece he is, how great his leadership is. Denari was talking about how much he noticed West calling out the defense during the TNT game where he got to watch rather than working the game. Everyone is talking about West being the team vet QB, the persona that Bird as a coach brought to the Pacers or maybe a Mark Jackson.

    Basketball is a game/competition with rules and strategy, it's not just a straight-up athletic performance. Knowing how to win the game is a real skill with extremely high value. And that's not "how to draw fouls" and that BS stuff, I mean reading the floor and knowing where you have advantages or disadvantages and what you can do to make the most/least of those. West brings that more than any other skill and it means wins.


    • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

      I don't get the Danny hate and now more recently, the David West hate.

      I've read in game threads people bash his attitude, calling it "****-poor" and calling him worthless.

      The guy (D.West) has put the team on his back multiple times this season. Some people just don't know how to be happy with things. We have a pretty damn good thing going here, and all I ever read is bickering and complaining.

      Trading Danny this year would be one of the dumbest moves of all-time. We haven't even seen this team 100% yet.

      But then again this is the same board that calls players like George Hill and David West worthless after a few what do you expect.

      I'd like to get JJ, but no way if it means trading Danny. I mean come on.
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions


      • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        Man, how times change. The last infraction I got on this forum (lo these many years ago) was from a guy pushing for us to acquire JJ Redick.!

        It hurts me to say it, but that guy (long since gone) was right and I was wrong. I didn't think Redick would still be in the NBA after his rookie contract.
        What?!? You're being too hard on yourself.

        I'll ignore this line of argument, other than to say that in my opinion, Jeff's career has more left in it than JJ's.

        To be fair to the subject, Redick had to develop his game in a way that a lot of players with his NCAA experience don't. This idea that guys suddenly change drastically as a normal thing is wrong. I recall someone posting some McBob highlights from Duke and they were the same types of dribbles, passes, back-door oops and everything else he was showing here in Indy. For a time I did a lot of amateur NCAA scouting and I can't think of a player yet that has really played a lot differently than they did in college. Guys improve their shot a little, get some confidence or maybe a little strength, and maybe coaches and players just learn how to interact with them better, but non-rebounders don't suddenly start knocking guys off the block and ripping away boards.

        And a catch and shoot screen runner that is undersized for having the speed of an average SF and not quick enough for an NBA SG is not normally the kind of guy that figures something out and takes off. To me Redick is the classic MIP type of player, a guy who doesn't just get more minutes where only his raw numbers improve due to volume of play but rather is a guy who actually really improves his game in a couple of critical ways. He improved his strength IMO, and in statistical terms he learned to pass better (his AP36 went up) and learned to play better defense and to "keep up" which resulted in a noticeable drop in his FoulsP36.

        He always had the 3pt shot and could run off screens, but he started getting more minutes when he learned to play the other end of the court at a higher level.

        And back in 2008 I think the idea was more of a comparison to Reggie, and JJ has never developed that FTA game or overall scorers game. He still takes a large PCT of his shots from behind the arc, a higher PCT than Reggie ever did (like 50% vs 33%). This is why I still wouldn't trade for him as the starting SG. But as the specialist 3pt guy he'd give you what Green and Lance haven't been able to the last month or so.


        • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
          Here is a trade that could possibly work. Goes with JJ and Davis coming here that some are talking about on here. I personally don't like it, but it is interesting.

          Pacers get:
          JJ Redick and Glen Davis

          Spurs get:
          Danny Granger

          Magic get: Stephen Jackson, Cory Joseph, Miles Plumlee, Orlando Johnson and 1st round pick from Spurs.
          Whoa. Granger, Miles, and OJ for Redick and Big Baby? Overpay much?


          • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

            JJ's 5-5 from 3 in the 1st qtr. against the Pistons. Dude's got it stuck on auto right now.


            • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

              Originally posted by Doddage View Post
              Whoa. Granger, Miles, and OJ for Redick and Big Baby? Overpay much?
              It's an example to go with others idea of a trade. As I said, I don't agree with it.
              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL


              • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                Staying with a team doesn't necessarily have anyhing to do with loyalty. It could be b/c they like the team, they can make more money with their team, their family likes the city they live in, it's better for their career with their team, etc.

                I kept a job for years not out of loyalty, but b/c it met certain criteria that was quite beneficial to me. I was one of the best at what I did. I owed them no loyalty b/c I rec'd a paycheck from them, and they owed me no loyalty just b/c I gave them years of service.

                Stacey Paetz interviewed Foster at a game, and he stated he didn't want to leave the Pacers and wanted to come back. He waved the flag then he would take less money to stay. Why pay him millions more out of what you call loyalty in the "sunset of his career"? He was getting paid millions as it was. The 1st and foremost thing about professional sports is it's a business. He knew his career was winding down, and he had a history of injury problems. You want to reward his loyalty give him a car when he retired not mils that cause the team possible problems retaining players or getting other players.

                Again, we have a different view about what loyalty is.
                IIRC, Foster was being offered more by San Antonio than the Pacers could afford, and yet chose to stay here. So, yes, Foster showed his loyalty to the Pacers, and the Pacers reciprocated.


                • The notion of DWest being overrated is completely insane to me. This team is not a contender without that man in our locker room, period. Big Baby Davis is sure as hell not changing that.
                  Follow me on Twitter!


                  • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    A player has to perform and play 100% for his club. When a player gives you 110% for so many years then I have no problem if the ownership is going to give the player some more money than he deserves as long as it doesn't hurt a team.
                    Joining the convo late, but I think you can reward loyal players in many ways, like giving them a job in the FO. Or a Bentley, as in Reggie's case. The idea of giving players "thank you" contracts at the end of their careers is just bad cap management.

                    Now whether Jeff's (and Reggie's) last contract was a loyalty reward or just simply another bad contract is open to question. We wouldn't be the first team to give large $$$ to players who we thought could play, but turned out to be injury plagued.


                    • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                      Originally posted by Ant View Post
                      The notion of DWest being overrated is completely insane to me. This team is not a contender without that man in our locker room, period. Big Baby Davis is sure as hell not changing that.
                      You can not possibly know that until we go on a losing streak of epic proportions and miss the playoffs without him. Unfortunately right now I consider the Pacers pretenders. I've been so high on them for the past few years I have already started to grow tired of Vogel's maddening rotations. I think we are no better than we were two years ago when Vogel took over other than the development of our young players. This team is not going to beat Miami or Chicago with a healthy Rose in 7. As good as Paul George is, this team is still lacking. David West is the best scorer from the PF position I've seen the Pacers have, JO included, but trust me he is no Dale Davis with his rebounding or defense either, even though he is good. He is a good player that I'm starting to think is way overvalued around here. Definitely not worth a quarter of the salary cap, but neither is Hibbert but at least he is elite defensively. West is not an elite scorer even though he is more than solid. Lebron is elite. Duncan is elite. West is not. He is not going to put the team on his back and win you a championship.

                      My point is if Orlando had Howard last year it would have been no different than the Series with Chicago the year before. We just didn't match up well enough with either team to beat them in a series. But beating up on a shell of the Orlando team that dominated us for years and being up 2-1 on the champs was the biggest fools gold I've ever witnessed as a Pacers fan. We lost the next three in such a manner that has me questioning this teams true ceiling. West may be the weakest link in the chain defensively for the starters. If not him then who? You could argue Lance or Hill, but I tend to think they both are better defenders at their position that West is, and I'm not that high on Hill. He definitely is not a better defender than Granger, so when healthy you are arguing between West and Hill being the weakest link.

                      I think this team is better constructed for the power forward to be our fifth option. I think Hill needs his touches, Granger, George, Hibbert. They all need theirs. But that would only work if we had a real point guard that can create for others and also play defense, and we haven't had that since Mark Jackson. (Just leave Tinsley out of this, please). Maybe it is the offensive system we run. Maybe remnants of the JOB days still linger hence why our assist numbers are still bottoms of the NBA.

                      Granger or no Granger our system is not championship quality. We don't have good enough shooters or good enough creators at the wing positions. You need one or the other, and we have neither, hopefully only until Lance develops more and gets past his growing pains. West or no West, we will be lucky to get out of the second round. Home court chances are fading fast and I don't think we could take Miami, Brooklyn, Chicago, or the Knicks. We don't have a Lebron, or Dwade, or Rose, or Carmello, so what does it matter? We have borderline All Stars, and unfortunately to win championships in this league you seem to need at least one perennial All Star starter. Our road record makes me believe if we don't have any type of HCA, we will not escape the first round.

                      Ok that may be most negative post ever. I'm just going to stop there. I literally turned off the other game early in the third the other night and just left. It's like I don't even get excited about this team anymore. We are starting to slide towards a first round exit in the playoffs.

                      Yes our defense is great, but our offense and careless turnovers are just sickening to watch. That is not Pacers basketball. I want Reggie era basketball. Reggie was a pure shooter, and I can't think of one since. And it doesn't surprise me we haven't sniffed the Finals since and I don't think we will until we have at least one.


                      • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                        As to Redick, the fact that Orlando wouldn't accept Granger for him doesn't mean he's more valuable than Granger, it just means they're looking for a different kind of return. By the way this notion that Granger is over the hill while Redick is some upcoming young SG is ridiculous - Redick is just a year younger!

                        Seems to me that if Orlando rates Redick as highly as this thread indicates, they'd be better off just re-signing him. I doubt that Orlando will get more than a mid first rounder for him.


                        • Redick and Afflalo cannot play together. No way Redick is resigned unless they trade Afflalo.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 01-28-2013, 08:11 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


                          • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                            It seems like quite a few of you on here have the "what have you done for me lately?" syndrome goin' on in regards to Granger..

                            Ya'll gonna look real foolish WHEN DG33 comes back full force , not skipping a beat.....

                            Reminds me of that song "Forgot about Dre" only substituting Granger for Dre..

                            ♫♫♫ "Nowadays everybody wanna talk like dey got somethin to say, but nothin comes out when dey move dey lips... just a bunch of gibberish and muthaf#@%#% act like dey forgot about Grange (er)" ♫♫♫

                            DG is one hell of a player, and will most definitely be the cog we've been missing in our offense..

                            For my analogy, we will assume that this team is like high-end racecar with a souped up engine.. and for arguments sake the max amount of cylinders in this fantasy analogy is 5... which 5 represents our 5 starters... (we will exclude the bench in this example)

                            So anyways... offensively.....
                            This team started out this season only firing on 1 or 2 cylinders ... then after that first month and a half we started firing on
                            3 consistantly, and 4 every once in a great while (blue moon)...

                            Now defensively, I'd say we have consistantly been firing on 4 cylinders at least 90-95% of the time, and occasionally we'd be fully dialed in totally..

                            I truly believe that once Danny comes back and shakes some rust off, offensively we will consistantly be firing on 4 to 5 cylinders 90-95% of the time matching our defensive intensity...
                            I also think Roy will come back around offensively once DG gets back, and that our already top defensive ranking, will only get better with Danny on the floor...

                            I really think Danny is the missing piece that will make everything come together for this team..
                            Last edited by Kemo; 01-28-2013, 06:47 AM.
                            "They want to be famous. We want to be champions. They want to be rappers and backup dancers. We want to play football." - T.J. Ward, Denver Broncos


                            • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                              I think we are no better than we were two years ago when Vogel took over other than the development of our young players.

                              I'm sure that 98% of the posters here are going to disagree.

                              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                              We don't have good enough shooters or good enough creators at the wing positions.
                              Show me the great shooters and creators that Memphis has. Can you? Of course not.

                              Teams that are post heavy do not have great creators at the wing positions. Why? Because there is not enough space for iso or penetration. It's the same reason why our PGs tend to spot up rather than penetrate.

                              If people consider Memphis championship contenders then they have to consider the Pacers as well. If they don't, fair enough. I can understand why some people think that Miami, OKC, Spurs and LAC are on another tier. It makes sense.

                              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                              Home court chances are fading fast
                              They really are not fading fast. A win tonight and we are exactly where we want. February is our homestand and the time that we will make a run. If we start losing in February I will agree that home court chances are fading. But the most logical thing is that we go on a run in February and get some seperation from the Bulls until Rose returns. And then it's everyone's game. Our home court chances are far from over.

                              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                              Our road record makes me believe if we don't have any type of HCA, we will not escape the first round.
                              Our road record without Granger is going to be irrelevant in the playoffs with Granger. Doesn't it make sense?
                              Last edited by Nuntius; 01-28-2013, 07:45 AM.
                              Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
                              Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.


                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.


                              • Re: RicBucher, Pacers interested in JJ Redick.

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                Redick and Afflalo cannot play together. No way Redick is resigned unless they trade Afflalo.
                                Is Afflalo going to ever be any good? Should Orlando keep Redick, since he has an elite NBA skill, and go ahead and trade Afflalo? Just curious, I always though Afflalo would turn out to be a really good player and he seems to be just another guy so far.