Tweet
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
I'm hoping we use Ike as trade bait.
I'm hoping we use Ike as trade bait.
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.
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
-
This space for rent. -
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Do you believe this team is a few trades from being better. Ike is young with potential we need to stockpile those types of players. Because this team has no future, and doesn't have enough trade value to rebuild itself with experienced vets.Originally posted by AnthemComment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Fixed.Originally posted by AnthemAsh from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Yeah, I do actually.Originally posted by IMissReggie View Post
If we are low enough to keep our lottery pick and we get Law, then we package up Foster and Tinsley with a ton of young talent and shoot for a Ray Allen / Michael Redd / Paul Pierce type player. I'd happily give up Harrison/Ike/Shawne/Rawle/Greene all in the same trade.
We'd pretty much be instantly better. By a lot.This space for rent.Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
I actually don't think you are off in your assessment. This is a different team with Marquis Daniels. If Lewis leaves Seattle, I think they would have to start listening to offers for Allen. We could offer a pretty sweet package. In this package we should offer anyone not named Jermaine O'Neal. If that doesn't work, then you can blow it up but right now we have a great cornerpiece to this franchise. The man just needs some help.Originally posted by Anthem View PostComment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
In regards to your Foster-Ike analysis, do you really think that we could use Foster for trade bait instead of Ike and get the same kind of value?Originally posted by CableKC View Post
I just don't see it happening because of the way that NBA GM's are enamored with "potential" these days, and it seems to me like there is still a consensus around a lot of the league that Ike is a possible star of the future. Right now, Foster is what he is: a hard nosed guy who can rebound, play some defensive, but has little offensive capabilities, while there is still a bit of an aura of mystery around Ike's potential.
I think this offseason with him will be telling, though, because unless he drastically improves his value will never be higher simply because of how intriguing many seem to view him right now, and this is a condition that is very temporary and probably won't last into next year so much. If we don't trade Ike this offseason, I see is committing to him long term.Proudly supporting the Indiana Pacers since 1992.
Currently on the Darrell Armstrong, Mike Dunleavy, Jr., and Marquis Daniels bandwagons.
sigpicComment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Enjoy your New Jersey game. That's the Pacers with Ike instead of JO.Originally posted by IMissReggie View Post
And maybe check the FULL SEASON sample. End of debate. Dude takes a charge or 2 PER game and also throws in 2.7 blocks, and with that ends up changing several more shots near the rim. Still pulls down 10 boards...oh, and runs the other team into foul trouble on a regular basis while being nearly a 1 man show most of the time. And for the year he's top 10 among bigs in assists per game.
But yeah, I pulled a 2 game sample.
Speakout, I would agree but then I read stuff like IMissReggie and I realize that some people truly hate JO for some reason.
I don't know that Ike is much trade bait now because I think the word on him might be getting out. Of course he has potential still in some minds so you might get something from him.
Honestly I wasn't thrilled with the trade before, but now I'm starting to think that GS really jobbed the Pacers pretty badly. I don't need Jack on the team, no problem that they moved him. Al was asking for it and Saras was a flop. But cripes, bring something this team could actually use back in the deal. Maybe if DG and Shawne weren't already here, not to mention Maceo.
At the time people said that Ike was the key to the deal. Well Ike needs to get a LOT better to keep Indy from taking the blunt end on this one.
BTW, this
Isn't true. He's at 44% actually for March.Hell even with those two huge games hes scoring less than 39% of the time
Plus you do recall him being out for 3 games due to INJURY. The guy is averaging over 37 mpg, but in March he's been at 30 or less minutes in SEVEN of the 11 games he's played, plus the 3 he didn't play at all.
But you figure that proves he stinks, because it took him several games to get up to speed enough to go totally off.
You know what I miss? "I miss Reggie" making you look like a hypocrite. Care to post the sample space of his 3pt shooting in his final year? We'd all love to see what a guy aging or injured shoots when he's a HOF player. Do you really miss 32% from 3 with 4-5 a night? No worries, Tins and Army give that to you right now, it's like Reggie never retired.
Plus you do realize that JO is handing out 2.4 apg right now and that Reggie Miller's career average is at 3.0 (5 of his last 8 seasons his apg were 2.4 or lower), but with only 3.0 rebounds per game to go with it, no blocks, not a ton of steals and not that many charges taken either.
(ps - I love Reggie and this isn't a Reg vs JO debate to me, both are Pacers all-time greats IMO, just pointing out that even greats have flaws to their game).
And all his numbers went down after the trade. I can't imagine why that might be. Maybe the same reason why the W-L record went into the dirt. They took back less talent and at the wrong positions.
Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
I don't hate JO by any stretch of the imagination. I think he's a great second option player, in the same category as a Lamar Odom, but the circumstances dictate that he play like a first option superstar ever night, and even then we still don't always win very much. We also pay him first option money, but I don't blame JO or even TPTB for that, because like it's been discussed in another thread, the going rate for JO was a max contract when he was an FA, and if we hadn't offered that, he'd be playing for SA now.
My biggest concerns with JO are his injuries, and none of that is a personal hatred, it just seems like every 5-10 games or so he ends up sitting a couple of games out because of knee/leg problems. If everyone thinks this uproar is bad, think about what it could be like if JO's problems compound in the next couple of years and he's sitting out even more.
For me, two things seperate Reggie from JO. I think Reggie had more natural leadership qualities, JO isn't a bad person by any stretch of the imagination but I think he would benefit greatly both on the court and mentally if we had a 25 ppg guard on the court. Just think of the hell Odom would be going through right now if he had to put the Lakers on his back, because the talent pool on the Lakers is similar to that of an expansion team when you take Kobe and Lamar out of the equation. The second thing that seperates these two players is simply health. Help me out here if its needed, but the only time I remember Reggie having anything resembling a lingering injury was when he injured his eyes against the Hawks in the Playoffs that year.Proudly supporting the Indiana Pacers since 1992.
Currently on the Darrell Armstrong, Mike Dunleavy, Jr., and Marquis Daniels bandwagons.
sigpicComment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Let's start with comparing Odom to JO, they're not even in the same league of status and production, so you're way of base there.Originally posted by colonialspacers View Post
As far as Reggie injured, hmm playing for USA he "injured" his ankle, wchih pretty much cost him most of the season after that and made him miss 15 or 16 more games at the start of the season thereafter.
but hey, he retired so his star keeps on rising.
and as far as leadership goes? I more and more doubt Reggie ever was a leader on this team, in "the" leader, part of the gang of leaders yes, but "the"? nope
Dale, MJ, they were the real leaders up to 2000 then Reggie became "uncle Reg" to the players and he started moving JO to the forefront saying it was now "his" (JO) team and he has kept that up till he retired.
JO not a leader? that's only true if you believe bball's theory of the game 8 situation, and even then doubtfull because all reports are that he gets into players hair quite a lot for not producing. The fact he doesn't call them out in public doesn'tmean he's not "hte leader" of this team, just that he handles it with class.So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.
If you've done 6 impossible things today?
Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!
Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Naptown, what are you talking about we are losing with or without JO.
And no Naptown, for the season his stats aren't that great. Not averagin 10 boards, and has a bad percentage. But when we needed our franchise player to put us on his back and lead us down the stretch. JO didn't even fail to elevate his game, it took a substantial hit.Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
JO is a lot better than Lamar Odom...but he is no leader and Reggie was not really a leader type either. That's part of the reason this squad fell apart. There is no leadership.Originally posted by colonialspacers View Post
As for injuries, JO has been a mess. He cannot be relied on to be there when you need him. He is the best player we have right now...so if a trade is made, we absolutely need a fair deal.Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
I think that there are teams out there that would have a genuine interest in Foster. His contract isn't huge or even long....despite his lack of offensive capablilities....he is more then capable of providing some hustle, he rebounds and depth in the Frontcourt as a bench player or a standby starter. Don't get me wrong....I don't expect that we will get an All-Star or some high-quality starter....I think that we could get a very solid roleplayer or even a solid backup player in the Backcourt for him.Originally posted by colonialspacers View Post
Getting back a solid player in the backcourt will help us....but the main reason to move one of the Frontcourt player is to simply move Ike up the Big Man ladder. This is especially important to develop Ike ( which many of us assume was one of the reasons why we pulled the trigger on the GSW trade ). He may have years to develop into a somewhat decent player....but he will never do it on a team where there is a huge lineup of Big Men that are ahed of him in the rotation. Murphy isn't going anywhere...and assuming that JONeal stays...Foster is the most likely candidate to be moved.
Given the dire need to make improvements in our roster...either through additions or subtraction.....Foster is one of the few tradeable asset's that this team has that another team would actually want. I would love to keep Foster....but I think that he is a luxury that we will be forced to give up for the sake of improvement.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
IKE is going to be good, but like Granger he is a couple years away (though I see Granger breaking out next year). IKE has to improve his passing ability, especially out of double teams, and I believe he will. JO and him could play together, but no way RC gives it an extended try and I'm not sure this is what the team needs to have happen anyway. Our back court is what really needs to change, and to do it, we may need to make a huge shift in the balance of our team. JO is the only piece on our team that could be moved for another player of his level. JO could be shipped out this summer and I feel this team needs an ALL STAR level SG in any trade we make. Someone who is consistent and can get to the rim, and yes plays defense. JO is the best chance for us to get a player like that. If we trade JO, send him West. TINS could be packaged with him.
The Pacers needing a new PG is for another thread. Now back to IKE.
I am going say IKE will do the job and step in if JO is moved, but fans have to give him some time. He needs a summer in our system, working on his passing skills and overall game. I also look for him to play in the Summer League. He isn't going to be JO, he will be IKE, but I think he could do it, again a couple years away from being a consistent threat in the post. People keep harping on him being too small. That is true he is small for his position, but that doesn't have to stop him from being who he is (IKE) and being a force down low.
To be ContinuedAvatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - APComment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
Jury is till out on Ike like Granger this is only his second year. I think his basketball IQ is fine if someone works and he takes the time to work on his game. Dad is a doctor and mom is a teacher so I'm sure he can pick up things pretty quick.Originally posted by Hoop View PostRose colored glasses?
Perhaps you should remove your JO hate colored ones.
As for Ike, I'm pretty disappointed in him, especially with all the hype on this forum about his potential. He has NO basketball awareness. Every time he sees (or doesn't see) a double it's like the first time he's ever been doubled. I don't know how he had such great numbers in college with his seemingly low basketball IQ. I hope he comes around, if he doesn't come around this trade looks even worse for us in the long run.You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....Comment
-
Re: Ike and JO...will they ever coexist?
JO and Odom not the same in production? Odom averages 16 and 10 on a team where Kobe is arguably the first and second option. JO averages 20 and 10 on a team where the offense seems to be designed to go exclusively through him on every play.Originally posted by able View PostProudly supporting the Indiana Pacers since 1992.
Currently on the Darrell Armstrong, Mike Dunleavy, Jr., and Marquis Daniels bandwagons.
sigpicComment
Comment