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

Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

    http://hoopshabit.com/2017/04/11/ind...-teague-trade/

    Last summer, the Indiana Pacers traded George Hill for Jeff Teague in an effort to add additional athleticism and playmaking to the point guard position. A season later, let’s take a look at how this deal has worked out so far for both teams.

    Larry Bird has been trying for two years to move the Indiana Pacers toward a more up-tempo style of play. He has made numerous roster moves in order to build a team that fits that profile.

    Mobile center Myles Turner was drafted and players such as Monta Ellis and Thaddeus Young were acquired via trade — all to satisfy Bird’s vision of having a core group of players who can play fast and score effectively.

    The final piece to that puzzle was obtained on July 7 when the Pacers entered into a three-team trade with the Utah Jazz and Atlanta Hawks.

    Indiana traded George Hill to the Jazz, while the Hawks sent Jeff Teague to the Pacers. Atlanta came out of the deal with rookie draft pick Taurean Prince, courtesy of Utah.

    Bird brought Teague to Indiana because he wanted (in his own words) a “real” point guard; someone who has quickness, speed and the ability to facilitate a fast-paced offense.

    Now that the 2016-17 regular season is coming to a close, we can look back at the Hill/Teague trade and see how both teams have fared to this point.

    22 Mar
    Orlando @orlandoweise
    @SethayatesDFS I'm torn on the Jazz. Didn't Teague go off on them the other day? And Butler?
    Follow
    Seth Yates @SethayatesDFS
    @orlandoweise Yes but Teague has always destroyed George Hill. This doesn't even include Monday https://twitter.com/SethayatesDFS/st...51099488944128 …
    7:44 AM - 22 Mar 2017
    Retweets likes
    George Hill has had a terrific season in Utah, averaging 16.9 points, 4.1 assists and 3.5 rebounds per game for a very good Jazz team (currently tied for fourth place in the West).

    Hill has given Utah a steady veteran presence at the point guard position and he’s played at close to an All-Star level for much of the season.

    When evaluating this trade from Indiana’s point of view, however, it is not so much what Hill has done for the Jazz, but what Teague has done for the Pacers in comparison to what Hill contributed when he was in Indiana.

    Here is a statistical comparison (from Basketball-Reference.com) of Teague’s 2016-17 campaign against Hill’s final season as a Pacer (2015-16):

    Per Game Table
    Player Season G MP FG% 3P% 2P% eFG% FT% TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
    George Hill 2015-16 74 34.1 .441 .408 .466 .528 .760 4.0 3.5 1.1 0.2 1.4 2.0 12.1
    Jeff Teague 2016-17 80 32.4 .440 .359 .471 .490 .870 4.1 7.8 1.2 0.4 2.7 2.0 15.3

    Hill’s three-point percentage and effective field goal percentage were superior to what Teague has provided this season.

    However, Teague has been a much better free-throw shooter and he’s been a more potent scorer in addition to posting a more efficient assist-to-turnover ratio.

    Interestingly, the Pacers were 11th in the NBA in pace last year, as compared to 17th in 2016-17. One thing Teague has not been able to do is allow Indiana to play at a more crisp tempo, as Bird had envisioned.

    Defense is hard to quantify, but one of the better metrics available for that purpose is NBA Real Plus-Minus (via ESPN). In terms of Defensive Plus-Minus, Hill ranked 13th among point guards last season; Teague is rated 25th in that same category in 2016-17.

    Teague has posted a superior on court/off court number this season in comparison to Hill’s tally from 2015-16. According to 82games.com, Teague has a solid net plus-minus of +3.3, while Hill only earned a +0.4 last season.

    Based on a one-season sample size, this trade appears to have been a plus for both Indiana and Utah, although not in equal proportions.

    The advantages Teague offers — athleticism, ability to get into the paint, advanced passing skills — have had a positive overall impact on the Pacers.

    Diranggoin @CAVEEMAAAN
    Teague to Indy, George Hill to Utah. Not a bad move I guess. Still a win-win situation ��
    2:13 PM - 22 Jun 2016 · Valenzuela City, National Capital Region
    1 1 Retweet likes
    Hill has been an excellent addition to the Utah Jazz, having perhaps his best NBA season in 2016-17. Hill has had an injury-plagued year, however, playing in just more than half of Utah’s regular season games.

    Despite that fact, he remains a primary reason the team has improved markedly since their non-playoff season of 2015-16.

    The next phase of analyzing this trade will come this summer, when both Teague and Hill will become free agents.

    Whether or not their current teams can re-sign them will be a huge factor in deciding how beneficial the Teague/Hill deal ultimately was for the Pacers and the Jazz.
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

    Nope. I'm still good with Teague.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

      I was very much against the trade of Hill for Teague. I was hoping for a trade that paired Hill and Teague for the Pacers.
      Still think that setup would have worked much better.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

        I also prefer Teague to GH3, though I have tremendous respect for what Hill brought to this team, and ideally would love having him playing next to Jeff as the shooting guard. His defense is clearly missed here, but offensively Teague has been better all around. Hill's defense wouldn't be missed as badly if we had a normal-sized, starting quality SG. Monta doesn't fill that role properly (though he's playing well lately) and GRIII being starting-quality is debatable at best.

        Overall, I thought it was a good deal when it was announced, and I think it's turned out well for everyone.
        It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

          George Hill has had his best year as a pro but has only played 48 games on the Pacers with him missing that many games, what would the season record be? I'm very happy having a point guard who plays 82 games in a season. On top its been very nice to see a true point guard lead the Pacers.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

            Personal feelings aside, this has been a very good trade for both teams and players. I'd even say a win-win by many accounts.

            Its a shame that Hill wasn't as healthy because he's been really effective this year. Even so, its been nice to see him get some recognition at different points throughout the season. Teague is more of the household name and has been recognized at tines as well.

            Free agency should be interesting for both guys this summer. Both guys have had their numbers dip a bit after ASB, but I'd still imagine both teams would want to bring these guys back. ,

            I'd also imagine teams like SA or Brooklyn would want to take a look as well. Considering history, I'd be highly surpriaed if Pop and Buford didnt inquire about George.

            No matter who you prefer (most prefer Teague obviously, especially due to recent health), this season has proved something I've long thought about both Guys... they're both mid tiered PGs who have completely different games yet do quite a bit to help their teams win games.

            Edit: even I can admit, you can't help your team win if you aren't playing more than 50 games. I hope George can shake the injury bug and continue his strong production during the playoffs
            Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 04-11-2017, 12:16 PM.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

              Great trade because of the games played. If the Pacers don't make that trade and Hill had all of these injury issues here, then we win like 30 games.

              Both will be ungodly overpaid this offseason but such is NBA life in 2017. One day it will come crashing down like the late 2000's housing bubble.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                Win - Win. Can we move on now ??

                No, of course we can't. This will go on and on and on and .......

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                  With Lance back, Hill looks more interesting to me. But I still prefer Teague for the following reasons:

                  1) Health - obviously that is an issue with Hill and may well get worse.
                  2) Assists - see below
                  3) Age - not a big factor but Hill is older than our stars (Paul & Myles)

                  A good offense will beat a good defense. I think Hill provides better defense and Teague better offense, factoring in his ability to make plays. I think a playmaker, even in the context of shared team play making, is extremely valuable. A guy like Teague has the capability of helping the offense flow. This is why Lance has helped so much. He has helped the backups execute. Teague is actually better than Lance at that. Teague is really excellent and the Pacers need to get their act together and learn how to leverage Teague's talent. That is the #1 issue I have with the team right now. They have not acquired the right pieces at times and they do not have good offensive strategy. They are succeeding offensively largely because Paul is playing out of his mind, Lance is killing it with the backups and Teague is flat out awesome getting the ball moving. That's just talent. That's not much coaching strategy.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                    I am ok with the trade, in an ideal world we trade Monta instead of Hill but I can see why that would not have been enough to get Teague. I would LOVE to have Teague and Hill together. I also like how Teague has played all season, Hill is injured way to often.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                      Pacers stole that trade, also how can you said this with an straight face?


                      George Hill has had a terrific season in Utah
                      I'm sorry but you can't have "a terrific" season if you are getting DNP's most of the time.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                        I think the playoffs decide this. Yes, Teague has the upper hand now due to injury. But say we don't make it in and GHill has an incredible playoff run putting up the numbers he did early this season?

                        If GHill goes nuts in playoffs like he did to start the year he could get near max.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Edit: even I can admit, you can't help your team win if you aren't playing more than 50 games. I hope George can shake the injury bug and continue his strong production during the playoffs

                          It looks like somebody is finally starting to recognize Hill is injury prone?
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                            I'd still rather have had the draft pick than either.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Revisiting George Hill-For-Jeff Teague Trade

                              Hill has never played a full season at an near all-star level...which is an important reason why he has not been on the all-star team. He has the "potential" to do it. He has played very well most of the year for Utah, although his numbers have slid from earlier in the year. He's basically settled into that 16ppg area, good shooting, great defense level of play. Very solid.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X