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's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

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

  • Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

    Hello all. I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving holiday.

    It's in my nature, from a coach's point of view that I come from, to always look at things from a short term perspective. How can I make my business function better TODAY? Or, in the basketball sense, how can we best win the game TONIGHT? What do we have to do to win the VERY NEXT GAME? Since thats how I think Carlisle and most other coaches in the professional level look at it too, usually most decisions they make are based on that way of thinking. Today, I want to hit on a couple of random topics and discuss whether our short term goals of being a better team in the immediate future is getting in the way of what we need to be doing long term, and hopefully spark an intelligent discussion.

    Topic number one on my mind is Marquis Daniels, and our backcourt players in general. While it defies my own coaching common sense, its apparent to me and most of us watching with an objective eye that Darrell Armstrong is providing us with a spark, defensive intensity, and even shooting that none of us expected. Even more surprising to me, while inconsistent on an every night basis, clearly the pairing of DA and Sarunas off our bench has been a very good combination for us. For whatever reason, we've played better and had more success when those 2 players have been on the court together than when they've been in apart from one another. Our plays and design of what we are running seems to function better, especially on the nights Sarunas is making shots. RC has clearly discovered this, and DA has become his security blanket in the rotation, and with his play justifiably so. My question is, is this really a good thing for us long term?

    I think my answer as a long time Pacer fan craving a championship is no. Most likely, when we are truly a championship level contender again, Armstrong will be gone, and probably Sarunas too. I don't know about the rest of you, but I simultaneously cringe and cheer when I see either of these 2 guys play well, because I know the natural tendency of the coaches will be to play Armstrong and Sarunas more minutes, at the expense of Marquis and Rawle Marshall. On the other hand, those 2 guys when playing well have really helped us win the 7 games we've won this year, and we really have had big time minutes from both of them. It's hard for me to decide what I think is best to do, but I think Im realistic enough to know that in a lot of ways winning games with them now might be counterproductive to our long term goals of being a true elite contender.

    I still think, as I said last week, that I believe Id play and even start Daniels at the point, to improve our defense at the point of attack, and to see if he can be a player who can fill that role for us. I think in my own mind Ive decided that Tinsley is a nice player, but is not a championship level point guard with the team currently configured this way. I think we need a starter at that spot as a long term answer, and I want to see if Daniels is it.

    I feel this way about David Harrison too. My gut tells me, instead of all evidence, that David would be a better starter than backup. I certainly cant defend a decision to start him based on the merits of how he has played, but I think its important this season to once and for all decide for ourselves if he is going to be part of the next truly great team here. I already know Foster is what he is, starting him doesnt tell me anything I dont already know, although I can see where it makes some short term sense. Can David be a legitimate starting center on a really good team? I dont know, but Id like to play him and find out this season. My original thought in the preseason was to play him at the start of the second quarter every night, play him all 12 minutes, and then play him the second half based on how the game was being played and what we needed to do to win. Obviously, RC isnt that comfortable in doing that, and honestly Harrison hasnt been able to stay on the floor anyway....and now he is semi-hurt and inactive. I think its smarter to play the kid bigger minutes and see what we've got for next year and beyond.

    That moves me on to players to really look at hard to acquire in the offseason of 2007. I think most of us would say we need help in the backcourt in some form (depending on how Daniels would do in my proposed idea to start him at PG), we need shooting in the backcourt, and we need an upgrade inside to help JO and Harrington. I challenge all of you to watch not just our own team play but to watch the opponents too, to see who they may have that might become available for us next summer.

    As for me, Ill mention 2 players off the top of my head who interest me alot, and would be at least somewhat realistic for us to acquire, and then throw this whole topic open to discussion:

    1. Darko Milicec.....the potential exact type big man to ideally pair with JO's skill set in my opinion. Orlando opted to not renew him at the start of the year I think, and unless Im mistaken he will be on the open market.

    2. Mo Peterson.....being pushed out of Toronto in a youth movement, I project him to be available around the MLE next summer. I really like his game and ability to shoot from the perimeter, and depending on how we manuever our wing positions might be a good addition. I'd prefer a younger player of course, but Im hoping some of you may have some thoughts on who might be a good fit as a SHOOTER.( Yes, I know Ive had a Mo Pete fetish for us since last summer.)

    Ok, now the big question for some of you to answer. Would you rather play DA and Sarunas as much or more than we are playing them now, assuming that they play well enought to squeeze us out another 5 to 7 extra victories for this one season, or would you rather experiment and risk making the playoffs this season to find out more about our young guys?

    Its hard to do and admit, but I think Id like to experiment still, just to find out where we stand with Daniels, Harrison, Marshall, and the rest. I dont think with the current cast playing big minutes we are much better than average, and I have higher goals and aspirations than that for our Pacers.

    As always, JMO.

  • #2
    Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

    The one question I have is, has David Harrison & Jermaine O'Neal ever shared the floor together for extended time in multiple games?

    I honestly can't remember if they have, I don't think so but my memory could be failing.

    It seems that David comes in & J.O. is out or if they ever are together it's for a very brief (usually due to some dumb@ss foul that Harrison has picked up) time.

    I'll be honest with you I'm really about done with Harrison, I've seen him actually regress the last two seasons & that is a d@mn shame really. I would almost rather see all of his min. not that he gets any, go to Powell.

    However I know it is really hard to give up on a guy his size & who has shown some talent in the past. I just wish he would improve instead of going backwards.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

      I understand what you mean Peck, but we also know just how slow big guys tend to develop in this league. I just dont think ive seen enough of him yet to make an informed judgment. For some unknown reason, I just LIKE Harrison, and I dont even really know why.

      I'd really like to see him play in a regular role and in regular minutes for a long stretch of the season, so we know more about what type of player he will be. Big guys develop so slowly I think its too early to write him off, but the day is coming soon financially where we are going to have to be able to make the right judgment about him.

      My guess is that he will be in the Dampier level of player, which is to say about average, with good nights and bad nights.....a role player on a good team, but I want to see him play to find out, and make sure he isnt better than that.

      JMO

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

        When TPTB drafted Harrison, were there any reports that they anticipated him being our eventual starting 5?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

          I like the idea of playing the young guys to see what we have.

          I would like to see Daniels start at the 2 with Green at point. Thats not much scoring from our backcourt but we would be improved at the defensive end.

          I've been in favor of throwing Harrison out there with the starters for more than a year now. That would give us a starting lineup of Harrison, O'Neal, Granger, Daniels & Green.

          Harrington would still get starters minutes off the bench.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

            T-Bird you make a number of excellent points as usual.

            I admit I really torn. In the moment I want the Pacers to win the game - if that means Jax, Saras, DA Tinsley play heavy minutes - then I say, OK, I want to win. But then I think about the long-term big picture and think I want Greene, Marshal and Daniels to get the big minutes. But that really isn't fair to JO and the fans who pay big money to see wins - or to Carlisle who needs to win games to save his job.

            The bottom line is this is a two year rebuilding project that started with the Artest trade and won't end until at least next summer. In a lot of ways this team reminds me of the 2001 Pacers - Isiah's first season -

            Having said this, I like the team spirit this season and it seems like they are truly rooting for each other.

            I don't think a Pacers team has ever confused me as much as this team does. I honetly cannot figure them out

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

              I don't really believe in "playing for the future". Too many variables. You develop Rawle and nothing comes of it, or he gets hurt, or JO and AL get hurt next year and despite his improved play the team goes nowhere.

              You gotta win while the winning's good is my view. I agree that young players do learn to play better, don't get me wrong. I just don't believe in tossing the kids out there in mass to struggle now so they will be great later.

              The Baby Bulls didn't really improve and in the end they did some serious trading and FA work to adjust that squad. If anything they were at their peak right off the bat.

              Wade, James, Melo - these guys got better but at the same time they started pretty hot in the first place. You don't turn a mid-level guy into a superstar just with PT. Some guys make that jump but I think it has more to do with them than just PT or coaching.

              Look at what happened with the brawl. Did the extra playing time change Gill, Edwards or even James Jones? JJ got noticed of course, but has he really become better than that Boston game just a few nights after the brawl when he outplayed Pierce?

              Rawle and Powell are seeing some PT already, even Greene gets to sneak in. I think they see enough to make progress already, and meanwhile Granger is the main project and obviously still has a way to go.


              Ultimately the "long term" Pacers plans feature either JO, Jack, Tins and AL putting it together now or being traded, period. That could very well mean that the playing time you hand out now ends up wasted. For example, the Pacers trade JT and Foster for a new PG and JO for a star SG. Suddenly Rawle or Daniels are less important simply due to the team structure (see how it went for the Mavs this summer for example).


              I'm with UB basically - this team still needs to figure the CURRENT situation out. We aren't at the point yet of saying "okay, we see what this is all about, let's move on to something new".

              No serious changes should come down till at least after the AS break. Even though we will have a good idea at 20 games I think we can already see a pattern of road struggles and home comebacks, along with inconsistant but sometimes impressive play. That could pan out to 45-46 wins which isn't that far off what was expected anyway, so why would the plan be abandoned?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                the long-term solution to the pacers problems is to just start over. the players we have now will never get it done, but i think bird and carlisle fear that if they go the starting over path, that the fan support won't be there. i think indiana just wants a pacers team that competes hard every night, plays solid fundamental basketball, and are class citizens. the team out there now is none of those on a consistent basis. i would absolutely love to work a deal with the bulls involving jo and a couple of the bulls young players with that nyk #1 draft pick. next year's draft should be loaded so i definitely think we can get our next 'franchise' player through this draft. don't know what else we can do to improve our team other than firing the coach or trading jo. these guys just aren't going to cut it now, or in the future.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                  Carlisle is the coach of the pacers, his next job and how much he is worth depends on how many wins he gets. Move along
                  *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                    I'm all for MoPete. I'd like to see Harrison play, but there's got to be something to these DNPs. Oh, to be a fly in practice and see what really's going on. I swear though, if we let him go and he goes Primoz on us, I'm gonna hurt somebody.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                      My big concern with Harrison is that he doesn't have a great attitude, or at least he doesn't seem to have a great attitude. Lord knows he has had his share of poor role models when it comes to mouthing off to the officials, but he just hasn't seemed to me like he has his head screwed on straight.

                      I don't think he is a lost cause, because obviously he is young, but I think he needs a mentor aka a Dale Davis to keep him in check, and to show him how a big man plays in the NBA. I am not sure who fills that role on this team. He particularly needs to avoid being such a magnet for fouls He is beginning to make Rik Smits look good in that regard, and that takes some doing. Like you said, he needs minutes, but until he figures this out, and maybe some more play will help, he will continue to stagnate.

                      Finally, I would like to see him start excelling at some of the dirty work. He has flashes, but he just isn't that consistent. With his size, you would think that averaging a double-double would be pretty attainable by putting back garbage shots and cleaning the glass.

                      On the other topic, I would definitely lean towards playing the young guys. I agree, that sadly, this is just not a championship caliber team. We have key voids that are unlikely to be met this season, so this is the perfect year to experiment with our youngsters.

                      Ultimately I think we still need to do some more house cleaning, although TPTB did not stand pat this summer and did make a number of changes. I have nothing new to add to our shortcomings with Jax and Tinsley, but I also think Jermaine is overrated. I think Jermaine is an excellent player, and the most talented player we have on the team, but I just don't think he dominates enough at his position to carry this team to the promised land.

                      We are new to this offensive system, and we will get better, but right now I see us as a mediocre team, and at best a pretty good team. Let the cream rise to the top this year, and then get busy in the off-season to tweak the roster to shore up our deficiencies.
                      When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winners circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor.
                      -Pat Riley

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        the long-term solution to the pacers problems is to just start over. the players we have now will never get it done, but i think bird and carlisle fear that if they go the starting over path, that the fan support won't be there.
                        co-sign. If they don't commit to the rebuild, the team will continue to be mediocre and never rise. I think "long term" went out the window with the James White cut. It's obvious they were thinking short term (with the phantom man, Maceo Baston). A rebuild with this team would not take as long as it might with most teams because there are already some keepers. I don't know that trading O'Neal is the answer (unless the P's get a younger player of similair ability in return, which won't happen), but the team could definately use a high draft pick. The past few drafts have provided some excellent point guard prospects (Chris Paul, Deron and Marcus Williams immediately come to mind). That said, Tinsley is not the problem here.

                        I personally feel the team could most use a franchise 2-guard, but it would have to be a guy who can distribute as well as shoot (like Wade). Daniels and Marshall look solid to me. But starting material? Probably not. Stephen Jackson is about as far from my ideal SG as you can get (doesn't rebound, doesn't get assists, poor shooter, slow, etc), and I personally kind of like Jack. But he seems best as the first guy off the bench, not as a go to guy.

                        As for who I've got in mind, I'm not sure, but I'm convinced the Pacers would be making the perfect move in trading for Gerald Green.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                          Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
                          When TPTB drafted Harrison, were there any reports that they anticipated him being our eventual starting 5?

                          I don't think so.

                          Here's what NBADraft.net had to say

                          "The team drafted David Harrison, a 7', 280+ pound C from Colorado, in the first round to provide a true pivot. Harrison is talented, but his consistent lack of effort in college make it doubtful he'll be able to give them much this winter".




                          HoopsWorld.com
                          had this to say

                          "2. David Harrison, Colorado
                          With the exception of some amazingly mediocre rebounding, Harrison's numbers are great. I'll take 53.9% shooting with some blocked shots any day. Pendergraft has raved about Harrison's work ethic. So why did so many people mention Harrison a probable bust in the unscientific study conducted by David Locke of the Seattle P-I? Work ethic and character, my friends. It seems to me there are a lot of big guys like that, with Loren Woods, Brendan Haywood, and Brian Cook fitting the mold in recent years. On Woods, the doubters were right; on Haywood, they were wrong. The jury is still out on Cook, though he looked pretty good when he did get a chance this season, and I'm expecting to eat some crow on him. So maybe that concern is overblown. In the first round, Harrison is a bit of a gamble. In the second-round, with little to no risk, he's a no-brainer.




                          SportsNutz.com
                          predicted the Blazers would draft him and had these comments.

                          "
                          David Harrison- Harrison isn’t supposed to have such a great attitude…are some guys tailor-made for the Blazers or what? Harrison has size, which will be important once Theo Ratliff becomes a free agent.






                          SI.com
                          in a Pacers season preview

                          "David Harrison -- Made it to the first round, but he's a project that needs a lot of work.




                          Andy Katz's take:



                          Harrison decided to stay in the draft, which means he's got to dedicate himself to get into the first round or it will be a waste. Harrison has first-round talent but has been inconsistent at times at Colorado. He's got the body to demand a high pick. Now he's got to prove it in workouts for NBA teams.



                          It's one thing when a renegade reporter says something negative about a player but when every reporter says it.....I don't think anyone has ever said David Harrison without ending the thought with one of the highlighted remarks from above.


                          I'm in these bands
                          The Humans
                          Dr. Goldfoot
                          The Bar Brawlers
                          ME

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                            On the long term vs short term , I want to beat the Blazers on Tuesday.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird's long term thoughts....the Pacers long term interests

                              I love the idea of looking at things from a long term perspective. What we all essentially mean by this is looking for a way the team can be good enough to win a championship, not just some regular season games and a playoff series every now and then.

                              There are two issues that I see on the Pacers in regards to winning a championship/long term planning.

                              #1 - The top 4 players/prospects on this team all play the same two positions. By this I mean JO, Al, Granger, and Shawne Williams. Even if Williams takes a couple of years to develop, there's no possible way to have these 4 on the court together. Granger is not a 2 guard. He can play the position defensively, but he is a liability as a secondary ball-handler. What this amounts to is a logjam where one or two players must eventually be removed from the equation. If the Pacers are committed to the up-tempo style they give lip service to, JO is the worst fit of these players followed by Harrington. They're both essential to this team right now, but if Williams develops into the player Bird thinks he can be, one of them will have to go.

                              #2 - You cannot win an NBA championship without excellent guard play.
                              Look at the last few championship teams: Miami (Dwayne Wade), Spurs (Parker & Manu), Pistons (Billups & Hamilton), Lakers (Kobe), Bulls (Jordan), Rockets (Drexler). The only exception in the past 20 years is the 1999 Spurs who had Duncan and Robinson. The NBA was a different league then, but they still had Avery Johnson who was a solid PG.

                              Now look at the Pacers roster. I don't see any guard on the roster with the potential to even be as good as Avery Johnson, much less all the other guards I mentioned. I agree with T-bird in that Daniels comes the closest, but he's got to learn how to shoot and run the point. Every great team has to have a dominant guard who can both handle and shoot.

                              Tinsley is a nice player. He can handle the ball and is a decent, if inconsistent shooter, but he has never shown the ability to take over the game a la Wade in the finals last year.

                              Jackson is also a decent player, but he cannot handle the ball well enough to be anything more than an average 2 guard.

                              Daniels has the size and the athleticism to dominate, but he needs to demonstrate some more passion, a better handle, and a better shot.

                              Orien Greene and Rawle Marshall are intriguing, but still far away from being what the Pacers need.

                              If the Pacers ever want to contend, they'll need to address these two issues.

                              Here's an idea that most people will hate, that could address both the short and long term issues with the Pacers. Trade O'Neal to Philly for Iverson and work a swap of 1st round picks into the deal. Since the Pacers don't have a firstI guarantee the Pacers will make the playoffs for the next two years, while PHilly will wind up with a lottery pick that comes our way. The Pacers have enough talent to help Iverson out that it would be the best team he's been on since the NBA finals team.

                              Just a thought.
                              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                              - Salman Rushdie

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X