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

Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

    Today we begin Memorial Day weekend with the first of this year's draft profiles, an intriguing look at the young PF from UCLA, Kevon Looney.

    Looney may have played his college ball in Westwood for Steve Alford, but in fact he is a midwestern kid, having played high school basketball for Milwaukee Hamilton High School in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Mr. Basketball a year ago this time, he spurned Coach Bo Ryan's program in Madison for greener pastures and warmer climates in Los Angeles. Measuring in at the NBA combine at a long 6'9 1/4, with a wingspan of 7'3 1/2, Looney easily has the length necessary to be a NBA legitimate prospect. He is skinny and undeveloped with his strength and power, as he weighed in at a svelte 222lbs. Born on February 6, 1996, he enters the draft at only 19 years of age.

    Looney led the PAC 12 in offensive rebounding, and overall averaged 11.6 ppg and 9.2rpg playing at UCLA. Today, we put his overall game under the microscope.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you are a scout who likes Looney for the pro game, what attracts you to him would be his overall length, upside, character, work ethic, and potential to develop into an ideal modern day PF on both ends. If you are a scout who doesn't like him, you hate how raw he is, how much time he may take to develop and be ready to contribute, and there may be other things about his game that while small, all add up to being problematic. Looney is truly an "in the eye of the beholder" type of prospect.

    On the positive side, you have to first mention his length and motor. Looney was a force on the offensive glass in college, using his long reach to get his hands on balls that others simply can't. While certainly not being a great leaper in my judgment, he nevertheless has an athletic attribute that I love, which is often being the first player on tape off the ground. It often isn't critical to be a HIGH leaper, but to be a SUDDEN leaper, and Looney is definitely a sudden leaper. He also is very aggressive on the glass in general and pursues the ball well, definitely being a player who rebounds out of his area. Rebounding is a big plus for Looney's supporters.

    However, I don't think he rebounds that well at the NBA level.....at least not immediately and maybe never. I don't think he gets a huge amount of "tough" rebounds, and he can easily be moved with solid blockouts by his opponents or by just being out fought and out toughed. Playing against full grown men at this stage is going to be a tough issue for him. Out reaching a much smaller player isn't always indicative of future success, and I see many of his rebounds being in that vein. Plus, so many of his boards are "finesse" type of rebounds where he slides between people instead of having to physically battling them that I worry that it won't carry over at a higher level.

    Looney has a high motor when he is fresh, but I saw lots of drop off in his game when he played in longer stretches against better opponents. When he gets fatigued or winded, I thought his effort level dropped somewhat, which while understandable for someone who is a teenager, still has to be noted. Hustle and length are what made him successful as a rebounder, but I think he may have been close to a net negative when it comes to HOW WELL HE HELPED HIS "TEAM" REBOUND. That analysis would require more study and time than I have access or interest to do....but did UCLA as a group really rebound better when he played vs when he didn't? I tend to doubt it based on what I saw.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Looney has a strong reputation in many places for being a plus defender, but I didn't see his potential on that end always equate to results.

    I have questions about his body type that I would need to be convinced on if I were making decisions for a team in this draft. I think he has a high waist with skinny looking legs....I wrote "weird looking" on several of my game notes about him. To me, that high waist makes him look inflexible and somewhat awkward when he is trying to get in a defensive stance. Sometimes he manages to get low and when he does, he is a plus on ball defender. But he often closes out very high and out of control, with his rear end way up in the air. I would want serious analysis of his body movement structure by my health and developmental staff to see if we could make him more flexible in his hips than he seems to play. Also, he clearly got worse as a defender as the season and game wore on, as fatigue would defeat him.

    I clearly do understand why some people would love his defensive potential however. His length is a potential major weapon contesting shots, and if could ever learn to move all of those arms and legs in the same direction, he will be able to switch ball screens, hedge hard, be a perimeter type rim protector, etc etc. I think he has POTENTIAL to be able to do all of those things, and to be an ideal stretch 4 defender.....a position we clearly don't currently have here in Indiana. He does in general contest jump shots with high hands, which is a sign of caring about winning and of being coached well...but he gets out of his stance too often while doing it.

    As a post defender, he quite frankly sucks right now. His weird shape and weak lower body allow him to be sealed with ease, and in fact teams did post him whenever they could isolate him. He was easy to seal, easy to trap behind, and like many young bigs he totally relied on his length to bail him out of mistakes. There is no way he could guard any veteran savvy bigger player right now because they'd just blast him right under the rim and score with ease.

    I don't think that will ever get fixed. I think he is either a long 3 or stretch perimeter 4 man who has to guard smaller players or players who play just like himself. He is a perimeter defender only in my view....which isn't bad necessarily, but it isn't exactly ideal either.

    If you fix his athletic limitations with change of direction, strength, lack of hip flexibility and "sink", add much more functional strength to his game and give him the right defensive players and system around him, then I think he COULD develop into a plus NBA defender....but there are a lot of "ifs" to that sentence.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Speaking above of some of his athletic oddities, he has another troubling one to me: He can't jump off of one foot very well. He can elevate, but only when he is jumping off of both feet. Going off one foot he is a decidedly below average NBA athlete, which means he has to gather himself in the paint, always will struggle to score in traffic, and will be a guy who gets his shot blocked more than he should. If you got frustrated with Tyler Hansbrough being that way for us, then you might as well get used to being aggravated watching Looney struggle with the same thing. Looney is definitely NOT an explosive leaper during games, no matter what the numbers may say in workouts.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Offensively he has potential.....which like they say, is a word that can get a coach or scout fired.

    If you like Looney, you'll no doubt point to his high 3 point percentage, which in college was 41.5%....a very healthy number. But digging deeper, I see some issues with that. First, that success was accomplished with a very small sample size....he didn't take very many attempts. I will say that his shot selection was very good, and he moved well to get those shots. He has nice footwork as a pick/pop guy and I liked how moved as a screen and face up guy, and even as a cutter. Still, it isn't like he was prolific or anything as he just shot less than 2 3point attempts per game.

    Secondly, I think Looney has a slow release that partially explains why he didn't take that many attempts......defenses were able to get to him before he could wind up and shoot! It takes a whole for him to get his lower body properly aligned underneath him, and he has to totally gather himself slowly to get his shoulders square to the rim. He cannot square in the air, he has to do it with the ball prior to leaving his feet. In the NBA, you often don't have that kind of time.

    Thirdly, I don't like his wrist action on his perimeter shot. If you watch his shot in slow motion, he thumbs the ball with his right thumb I think, and he follows through with his wrist not going straight down but instead going to the right. This is consistently a flaw in his jump shot, so maybe it is something he has done for a long time I don't know.....but I hate that. Like many shot flaws I am sure it can be fixed with reps and time, but I can't rate Looney as this knock down shooter with all of these evident flaws, despite what the numbers tell me.

    Looney as no post game at all at this point, so I would expect teams in the NBA will easily be able to put much slower weaker guys on him with no penalty except for the risk you take on the glass. His footwork as a post player combined with his lack of leg strength and high center of gravity make him a non entity in the paint. Plus, the above mentioned inability to jump off one foot takes away a lot of the little creative types of moves others figure out how to make inside.

    He does offer as I see it 2 potential strengths offensively besides his ability on the glass. First, I think he will be able to defeat a bad closeout eventually. To do that, I am assuming whatever team gets him is able to fix his mechanical issues with his jumper. I am impressed with Looney's ability to cover ground with very few dribbles going to his right. As a straight line right hand driver, he can be impressive if he can get all the way to the basket. But, even this has limits.....because his pull up game is bad, he will have to be able to get all the way to the rim....and because he can't jump off one leg well currently, finishing will be a problem. So, if you like Looney, you are assuming you can fix all this in time and make him a guy who attacks bad transition closeouts.

    Looney has a terrible left hand currently, so going that direction he will just need to move the ball on the to the next guy and try and get the rebound.

    The other strength offensively, and what I like watching the most about him, is his ability to take a defensive rebound and start his own fast break. Looney can go full speed with his right hand in most of those situations, and because he is unselfish and a good decision maker, having him lead your break after a rebound is a great thing for your team. You'd much rather have Looney as a passer than having to actually score himself in traffic on the move, though I do think he will be a nice spot up trailing guy in transition.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So, what do we have in Kevon Looney?

    In summary, I think we can say that we have a high character, smart, hard working young man who is very very raw and a few years away from actually helping a good team win. Being only 19, he has time to fix his numerous flaws, but I think he is 3 years away from being in a good team's regular rotation....so expect to see Looney playing a lot of NBDL minutes this season wherever he may end up.

    If he fixes every thing and reaches his peak upside, he could be a nice slightly better than average 4 man someday....but only if he is surrounded by the exact right teammates and system, and only if he is developed properly over a course of several years.

    He easily could bounce out of the league and not make his second contract if he is mishandled, but his length is elite, his character is high, and his numerous flaws are not that hard to figure out. I would assume that, as easy as I thought Looney was to scout, that other more professional scouts will come to the same conclusions and not pick him unless they can develop him properly.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Should Indiana consider him at #11?

    In my view clearly clearly not. We do clearly need a more athletic, younger body for our front court, and by the time he would be ready likely we'd have almost all new players for him to play next to. But I think Indiana will have better options at #11 and will easily pass on Looney.

    I see Looney going somewhere as high as #15 to Atlanta, even though I think that is way too high for him to land. #28 for Boston is probably his floor. For his own sake, I hope Looney goes to #26 and San Antonio, but I think me makes some for Cleveland at #24. I think he ends up at one of those spots.

    To me, this is the kind of player you pass on, but keep aware of his development so when he becomes a young free agent in his mid 20's you can potentially pursue down the line.

    NBA comparable: an even more raw Terrence Jones

    As always, the above scouting report is my opinion only.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

    Great having you back and I strongly agree.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

      Holy cow! He was born the day after my twelfth birthday. I am getting old.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

        Tbird's evaluation of Looney has me thinking a team might give him a go as a SF rather than a PF.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

          Obviously Looney would be a pick for the future.

          Larry doesn't swing for many homeruns, which makes me think Looney will not be out guy.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

            Thanks Tbird!

            You have clearly put A LOT more time and effort into analyzing players than I have. You have convinced me to drop Looney from my short list of players that I would like to see the Pacers draft.

            I am looking forward to seeing your analysis of the remaining 4 players on my short list.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

              I've said what seems forever NO to Looney, and T-Bird's eval just validates my belief.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                Ok, I'm sold. Next?
                This space for rent.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                  I think he's a tough player to peg because it seems like his weaknesses all counter his strengths. He's a good rebounder, but he's not incredibly athletic and he gives up position easily. He's a good shooter, but he has a slow release and is an awkward ball handler.

                  Basically, you're drafting his long frame and hoping he plugs some of the gaps.
                  Time for a new sig.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                    A bit worse analysis than I would have thought. I like Looney, but I do agree that 11 would be too high.
                    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                      Agree. Caught a few UCLA games and thought Looney to be a bit over-rated. Didn't pass my eye test which is usually pretty reliable. Pass.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                        Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                        Didn't pass my eye test which is usually pretty reliable. Pass.
                        Lol. You should be a scout

                        Edit: totally just giving you a hard time!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                          I love these posts!!! So excited for the rest of the series!!!

                          For many years, we have been searching for an athletic 4, that can also play the 5, as an ideal compliment to Roy. Is this the year we get one, yet move on from Roy. I sure do love irony.

                          welp?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            Lol. You should be a scout

                            Edit: totally just giving you a hard time!

                            It does sound a little funny, but so many people go by measurables and stats when eye test or just closely watching a players habits and body language...etc...can tell you a lot. There is somewhat of a difference between combine quickness and actual court quickness for example.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #1: Kevon Looney

                              Looking forward to the next post. Really intrigued by the drafts when the Pacers are around the top third and don't get any coverage here in the UK so some in-depth analysis like this, specified to the team I care about really is great. How regular are these posts going to be? One month today until the day.
                              Pacers fan since April 9th 2004 - New Jersey 80 Indiana 90.
                              Been to 42 Pacers games since November 2017.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X