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

2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

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

  • #16
    Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

    Solo has been the biggest dissapointment for me. He had a great opportunity here but he blew it.
    If he had worked harder in the offseason he could have improved his 3 point shooting to .350 ish and he could have been our best stretch 4.

    Mahinmi of course has been the biggest positive for this squad. I didn't think he still had it in him.

    PG was too eager to show that he is still as good as before, that he hit the "first year after a major surgery" wall. He will get better again.
    GH is as usual one of our most consistent players. I fear he won't re-sign with us, as he is not inefficient and not careless enough with the ball to stick around Monta and Paul for too long. Looking at the type of player he is and where he spent his first years in the league, it must drive him nuts.
    CJ remains a hot and cold type of player and should be coming off the bench and play the wing position.
    Lavoy Allen is a bench player but a good one.
    Jordan Hill is a placeholder but a good one.
    Budinger IMO needs a bigger role to get his confidence back. Better passers would help also cuz he is a guy you set up.
    It's a pitty Stuckey couldn't hold on to that 3 point shot he had last year, cuz it could have made the Hill-Ellis Stuckey rotation a lot more workable.
    Monta has been struggling offensively but once we get some bigs with a reliable jumper and the lanes open up for him, he will be better.
    Turner looks very promising but be prepared guys, he might average less rebounds than Hibbert with that jumper of his and the tendency to block every shot
    Young and 3 have shown flashes of their potential so time will tell.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

      Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
      Solo has been the biggest dissapointment for me. He had a great opportunity here but he blew it.
      If he had worked harder in the offseason he could have improved his 3 point shooting to .350 ish and he could have been our best stretch 4.

      Mahinmi of course has been the biggest positive for this squad. I didn't think he still had it in him.

      PG was too eager to show that he is still as good as before, that he hit the "first year after a major surgery" wall. He will get better again.
      GH is as usual one of our most consistent players. I fear he won't re-sign with us, as he is not inefficient and not careless enough with the ball to stick around Monta and Paul for too long. Looking at the type of player he is and where he spent his first years in the league, it must drive him nuts.
      CJ remains a hot and cold type of player and should be coming off the bench and play the wing position.
      Lavoy Allen is a bench player but a good one.
      Jordan Hill is a placeholder but a good one.
      Budinger IMO needs a bigger role to get his confidence back. Better passers would help also cuz he is a guy you set up.
      It's a pitty Stuckey couldn't hold on to that 3 point shot he had last year, cuz it could have made the Hill-Ellis Stuckey rotation a lot more workable.
      Monta has been struggling offensively but once we get some bigs with a reliable jumper and the lanes open up for him, he will be better.
      Turner looks very promising but be prepared guys, he might average less rebounds than Hibbert with that jumper of his and the tendency to block every shot
      Young and 3 have shown flashes of their potential so time will tell.
      I blame that on the Rudez deal. Just like Monta helped Ian with his FT shooting, I think Rudez helped Stuckey with his 3 point shooting. I would rather have kept Rudez for that reason alone, even if we never played him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
        I won't even get into detail because i get tired of defending the guy on the daily, but this isn't even remotely close to being true. He's been easily our most consistent and efficient offensive player over the last 15 games or so.

        Last 15 games (he only played in 13) - 15, 4, 3 on 50% shooting and 50% from 3.

        If that's inconsistent then idk wtf everyone else is doing.
        I am more talking about his assertiveness. I think he needs to put himself in the game more, he can and should be taking crunch time shots but he seems to defer far too often in those situations. I was thinking more that he would be more aggressive coming off the bench.

        I love George Hill, I think if he would assert himself more he could be the 2nd option. I consider him the 2nd best player on the team.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

          Originally posted by sav View Post
          I blame that on the Rudez deal. Just like Monta helped Ian with his FT shooting, I think Rudez helped Stuckey with his 3 point shooting. I would rather have kept Rudez for that reason alone, even if we never played him.
          Once you have picked up some very useful tips from another(player or coach), aren't you supposed to be able to remember those things when you are shooting threes?
          I agree it might have something to do with but it can't be all.
          I do know that Bird cares little about friendships. Rudez was a very much liked in the lockerroom (Hill was close with him too) and Granger too.

          But if he hadn't traded him, we would have had 5 project players, Solo and Rudez barely playing, so only 8 players with enough experience for the playoffs.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

            Team grades:

            Offense: B- A grade I give not because I necessarily like it but because, in general, it is doing what Frank (note I didn't say Bird) wants it to do. Clearly we can score points from time to time, but the patented Pacers scoring drought (which I still believe could make PS&E a fortune if they could get a sponsor for it) becomes apocalyptic on a team that has shifted its emphasis to the offense. I would give this a lower grade but I think the problem is execution, not design, which is reflected in the individual grades. The only thing that saves this from being a comparison to JOB-ball is that they at least make something of an effort to get a better shot early in the clock instead of simply firing up the first long ball that presents itself. The one thing I don't harp on yet is the turnovers, mainly because they are almost all a result of guys not yet knowing where their teammates are at the pace they try to play. This comes with team experience AND with individual experience, and we all knew neither of those was going to be really strong this year. That they tend to be turnovers that give up a score burninates me no end, for which see below.

            Defense: C- The point of a solid defense is often to wear players out so that their offense loses steam as the game goes on. The result of the Pacers' strategy this year seems to be that the frantic offense wears out our players so that they have no steam to put into defense as the game goes on. For away games, I sometimes think Chris Denari has Quinn's "They're a step slow" on one of those old fashioned radio station cartridges so Quinn can go hit the head and Chris can just press the button over and over and over. Their glacial reaction time in transition on a steal or turnover is frustrating, and it is hard to figure out if it is a product of focusing on offense and not wanting to expend the energy or something worse.

            Coaching: B- Would be a C+ if I just didn't have so much deep-down trust in Frankie. But, damn, some of these individual issues have got to be correctable through coaching. Either guys are breaking the game plan or they are being coached to stop moving the ball and try for sill contested shots. I suspect the former, but then why aren't some players getting some pine time? Yeah, NBA, don't disgruntle your stars, but .... well, just damn.

            Paul George: B And only this high because I think he has hit the injury recovery wall. I think he really wants to play well, I think he is really trying to play well, but his frustration with the calls, with his own fatigue, and with things in general is impeding his ability to do so. He shows glimpses when he is willing to give up the ball to guys playing hot, but then he seems to struggle with having that as part of his identity instead of being the guy who is the hero. On defense he seems to be giving 110% one play and going through the motions the next. One wishes we could send him to Jamaica or Belize or some other relaxing beach destination for a couple of weeks to get his energy back. Barring that, he needs to suck it up and start playing like a pro.

            Monta Ellis: B It is clear to me that as much as Monta frustrates me with his individual inconsistency he is critical to the functioning of this team as a unit. He seems to be the guy who is always at someone's elbow to give them a few words, to calm them down, or to give them a boost. I absolutely believe the information we get about how he is in the locker room. If only we could get what we were supposed to get on the floor - and if he could KEEP HIS DAMN FEET ON THE DAMN COURT WHILE HE DECIDES WHAT TO DO WITH THE DAMN BALL. Sorry, was that my outside voice?

            LaVoy Allen: C+ LaVoy giveth, and LaVoy taketh away. He can set a screen but then miss a bunny shot when the ball comes back to him. He can fight for one rebound and then poke another out of bounds. He can ... well, watch people go by on defense far too often.

            Ian Mahinmi: A Like Peck said, he could not possibly have given any more of what we have asked from him. The only thing that niggles at the back of my mind is that perhaps the "lazy" passing we are seeing is still a concession to his hard hands, and perhaps the increase in broken passes to him is because teams have realized it? Need to keep an eye on that in the second half of the season.

            George Hill: B+ When it is clear he has to come through to get a stop or a shot he can do it, but too often it seems like when we just need a standard set of good plays he lacks something. I think that is where his inconsistency comes from - I think the floor spacing just isn't good enough for him to be able to both distribute the ball and get it back while moving. That's why he tends to get rid of the ball and take up another position. I think that's also why we're seeing Monta do more ball handling. I think he's trying to make up for some of the other wings on defense, which is why he gets burned a lot - he isn't concentrating on his role but is worrying about what he'll have to do to cover someone else.

            C.J. Miles: A- Yeah, he's very inconsistent, but I think his play this year falls into the definition of taking one for the team. He simply does whatever Frank asks him to - and if some of it is beyond him, how is that his fault as opposed to the fault of the ones asking him to do it?

            Jordan Hill: B Simply put I did not expect him to settle into as consistent a role as he has. Early in the season I thought I was going to die if he put up another one of those flatiron hook shots, but now I actively look for him to shoot the ball.

            Rodney Stuckey: A- It's pretty clear that when we don't have him to insert into the game from the bench we lose a ton of energy.

            Chase Budinger: C+ I think he gets a lot less credit than he deserves for being a good solid bench player. He has active hands on defense, he has one of the better feels for what is going on with a pretty sloppy offense. Ultimately, he's a good guy for your youngest players to compete with for minutes - he's pretty consistent so there's something for them to point to and say "when you can do that every night you can get more time."

            Solomon Hill: B+ Like Jordan Hill, I really did not expect Solo to give us what he has this year. He surprised me by being ready to play, and in the limited role he has had I think he has been a net positive.

            Glenn Robinson III: Incomplete Hopefully we'll see more assignments turned in.

            Joe Young: Incomplete See above.

            Myles Turner: B Some beautiful moments but still looks a little lost from time to time.
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

              Candidly, the team is exceeding my preseason expectations. I started to get lured into raising my expectations (especially after the Wizards away game this year), but then continue to remind myself that this is a transition year. I predicted a .500 record before we started.

              Games like last night are exciting to me, b/c we're starting to finally develop our young players. You can see what will come.

              Young is a solid backup guard in the making. He'll have a higher ceiling than CJ Watson or DJ Augustine in the NBA, IMO.

              Myles is a solid starting 4/5. His stroke, given his size, is breathtaking. He also has surprisingly good court awareness. He is clueless on weakside defense. He needs solid rotation minutes at this point. Let him learn defense.

              I continue to be concerned with Paul George's on and off court demeanor. He is not acting like the leader this team needs and expects of him. Either something is going to have to click with him, or we need to swing for the fences for another alpha dog on this team.
              Last edited by docpaul; 01-18-2016, 03:31 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                I think this team right now needs a consistent lineup. Which, with injuries, is tough, I know.

                When Vogel replaced O'Brien, installing a consistent starting five with his five most talented players at each position is what led to both instant and long-term success. They grew together.

                If we did that, as soon as possible (injuries make this lineup not possible at the moment), I think that means a starting five of: G. Hill, Ellis, P. George, Turner, and Mahinmi.

                Coincidentally that gives us an offense-defense punch in the frontcourt.

                Bench... I'd probably roll with a nine-man rotation. Stuckey, C. J. Miles, Allen, and J. Hill.

                Again you have an offense-defense punch in the frontcourt!

                This is a fast team, big or small. I wish the FO would quit fixating on size and start worrying about whether we are playing basketball well...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                  Originally posted by sav View Post
                  Overall record C+. I expected us to have between 18-23 wins by mid season.

                  Frank Vogel C+. I think Frank has done fairly well with the talent he has available. What concerns me is that he has not set a team rotation, and changing starting PF's every other game really is not good for the team.

                  Monta...B+. He is our best distributor. After a slow start offensively, he is starting to score more. I don't know if that is because he is more familiar with his teammates or he is recovering from off season surgery. He also has done a pretty good job as a leader. He did wonders helping Mahinmi with his FT shooting.

                  GHill...C+. As usual, aggressive GHill is very good, non aggressive GHill is average. He is our best 3 point shooter and I think he should be our starting SG with Monta as the starting PG.

                  PG13...C+. He has done a terrific job recovering from his injury, however, his constant complaining to the refs and refusing to buy in to the plan the FO came up with is not indicative of a leader or star player. Whether he agreed with the plan or not, he should have given it a better chance and also talked in private with Bird and Voogel to come up with a compromise that would benefit everyone.

                  CJ Miles...C+. He was great when his 3 point shot was falling, when he started struggling he became virtually worthless. The reason he got as high of a grade as he did is because he stepped in to play PF when PG13 refused. That kind of sacrifice is big in my book.

                  Ian Mahinmi...A. He has done everything you could expect. The key to him getting an A in my book, was his improved FT shooting, had he still been shooting 30%, he probably would have only gotten a C or C+.

                  Rodney Stuckey...B. Stuckey has provided aggressiveness and offense off the bench. The only problem with him is that his 3 point shot has left. I didn't expect him to shoot 39% again this year, but I would have hoped he would be in the 30-32% range.

                  Myles Turner...A. He has done well for a 19 year old rookie. He stills struggles defensively, but he is a 19 year old rookie.

                  Jordan Hill...C+. He has been very good offensively and rebounding, but he struggles defensively. He is more of a Center than PF and at Center he offers no rim protection.

                  LaVoy Allen...C. When he is focused and engaged he is our best option at PF. The problem is that he is only focused and engaged about 1 out of every 5 games.

                  Chase Budinger...D. He makes good plays occasionally and doesn't seem to really make bad play but his shooting is disappointing and his defense is lacking.

                  GRIII....C+. He gets a C+ simply because of his potential. He makes some very exciting plays but also some bad plays. He get lost defensively but he is only in his second year and is, what, 21 years old?

                  Joe Young...C+. See GRIII.

                  Solomon Hill...B-. Solo should be our starting PF. He has the strength to bang with bigger players and enough quickness to defend the stretch 4's. Many complain that he is not a good shooter, which I think is a myth. As of today, he is a career 31.5% 3 point shooter. He shot 37.5% from 3 last season when GHill was playing. It's tough to get into a rhythm when you pay 2-3 games in a row and then don't play for 2-3 weeks. I am not suggesting he play 30 minutes per game, but he should be able to start and give us 18-20 minutes per game.

                  It's clear to everyone that changes need to be made for the second half of the season. Even if we don't make trades, changing the rotation will help...in my opinion. One of the advantages we had when we went to the ECF was that we knew who was starting and pretty much knew who was coming off the bench. Frank should make a decision and stick with a rotation.
                  I more or less agree with your evaluation. Pretty fair, IMO.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                    Nice post Peck. Good read!
                    Danger Zone

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                      Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                      Solo has been the biggest dissapointment for me. He had a great opportunity here but he blew it.
                      If he had worked harder in the offseason he could have improved his 3 point shooting to .350 ish and he could have been our best stretch 4.
                      I felt he did improve his 3 point shot drastically last season. From February to the end of the season, he shot 38% from 3. We simply have chosen not to use him this season and you cannot expect anyone to find consistency from 3 when they've played in roughly half the games and the minutes in those events have been all over the place.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                        Originally posted by I Love P View Post
                        Myles Turner: A
                        Ian Mahimi: A
                        Joe Young: A
                        Jordan Hill: B
                        Rodney Stuckey: B
                        George Hill: B-
                        Paul George: B-
                        Solomon Hill: C+
                        GRIII: C
                        CJ Miles: C-
                        Lavoy Allen: D
                        Monta Ellis: D
                        Chase Budinger: F
                        Thanks for being brutally honest. Ellis, PG, and CJ have been inconsistent and disappointing other than when their shots are falling. Which is not often at this point.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                          Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                          Candidly, the team is exceeding my preseason expectations. I started to get lured into raising my expectations (especially after the Wizards away game this year), but then continue to remind myself that this is a transition year. I predicted a .500 record before we started.

                          Games like last night are exciting to me, b/c we're starting to finally develop our young players. You can see what will come.

                          Young is a solid backup guard in the making. He'll have a higher ceiling than CJ Watson or DJ Augustine in the NBA, IMO.

                          Myles is a solid starting 4/5. His stroke, given his size, is breathtaking. He also has surprisingly good court awareness. He is clueless on weakside defense. He needs solid rotation minutes at this point. Let him learn defense.

                          I continue to be concerned with Paul George's on and off court demeanor. He is not acting like the leader this team needs and expects of him. Either something is going to have to click with him, or we need to swing for the fences for another alpha dog on this team.
                          I'm in the minority obviously, but I don't think trading him should be out of the question in the offseason. Bird would never do it, but I imagine we could get some good return and a player or two that is less inconsistent and mature. Tired of dealing with head cases on the Pacers just as Peck pointed out in the original post. If we were ever to trade George now is the time to do it while we are still figuring out the team identity and PG is in his prime age range.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                            Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                            Once you have picked up some very useful tips from another(player or coach), aren't you supposed to be able to remember those things when you are shooting threes?
                            I agree it might have something to do with but it can't be all.
                            I do know that Bird cares little about friendships. Rudez was a very much liked in the lockerroom (Hill was close with him too) and Granger too.

                            But if he hadn't traded him, we would have had 5 project players, Solo and Rudez barely playing, so only 8 players with enough experience for the playoffs.
                            Given the choice of keeping Rudez or trading for Budinger, I'd take Rudez. Save the team about $4 million, have someone that can either hit a 3 pointer to win a game or at least make the defense guard him and have a 3 point shooting partner for Stuckey. Yes, Stuckey should remember the points he picked up last year, but it wouldn't hurt to keep Rudez around unless you are trading him for a significant upgrade...which I don't think Budinger is.

                            I count 9 players with enough experience for the playoffs had we kept Rudez. Solo started all of last season. I think he would/could contribute to this team in a positive way. Frank for some reason just rarely uses him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                              I grade a little differently. Every one starts with a C based on my own expectations going into the season.

                              Coaching: C- Vogel gets a C cause he still does what he has always done and that was expected. Free throws and defensive coaching is awful.

                              Paul George: B- Started off the season better than thought, but now is playing like my expectation. Expect he picks it up after the All-Star break

                              Monta Ellis: B Adjusted to the team better than I thought. Never thought I would see him atleast try to play team ball but he is. Think the turnovers will come down later in the season.

                              LaVoy Allen: D This is only cause I was so high on him at the beginning of the season. Still doing things well but huge disappointment in expectations. Truly thought he'd be leading the team in rebounding. Better passer than catcher (though mainy passes down by his feet).

                              Ian Mahinmi: A+ Never saw this coming

                              George Hill: C- Would be lower but defensively he is meeting expectations. Offensively, wanted to see more of what we saw last year.

                              C.J. Miles: C Is what I thought he would be. Inconsistent

                              Jordan Hill: A Same as Ian. Has far exceeded expectations. A total steal at his salary. Has exceeded in offense, passing and rebounding. Has meet expectations on D.

                              Rodney Stuckey: B+ Has meet expectations but has done so playing hurt. Therefore, he gets a bump in grade.

                              Chase Budinger: D Crafty. Makes smart plays. Good hands for steals. Just expected a lot more offense and rebounding from him.

                              Solomon Hill: A This is more to do with low expectations more than his play. But I am impressed with his play. His defense is great and I have never denied that. But he is playing with heart and energy I have never seen him do in the time he has been a Pacer.

                              Glenn Robinson III: B Hard to judge with the little time he has seen on the court but has been a pleasant surprise

                              Joe Young: D Has more to do with the lack of playing time than he, himself. Thought for sure he'd work himself into the line-up more by now.

                              Myles Turner: A Really didn't think he would see the time he has seen so far. Truly thought he would only see garbage time and would be a much bigger project than he is.

                              Christmas: F Thought by now he would be in a Pacers uniform as out primary back-up PF. But than again, wasn't expecting J.Hill and Turner to be what they are.

                              Whit: D In the D-league right where he should be. Didn't like what I saw in preseason and not impressed with his numbers in the D league.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: 2015-16 Mid Season review and grades

                                Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                                Coaching: C- Vogel gets a C cause he still does what he has always done and that was expected. Free throws and defensive coaching is awful.
                                How the heck does Vogel get dinged for guys missing free throws?
                                BillS

                                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X