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

Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

    I just can't agree with this notion at all. Talent can only get you so far. You are forgetting we pay these guys millions of dollars for a reason. If they are so much less talented then we should just shut down shop and save the money.

    I can't agree with Chicago J on almost anything. TJ Ford is the best point gaurd we've had in a while. I just don't see how you can hate him driving to the lane when he has done so well in doing so.

    Now as for JT, I already went on my limb and said we should be playing him again. Forgive and forget. I don't see what he did that was so wrong. If I rememer correctly, someone was trying to kill him, and a shoot out went down downtown Indy that was like the "old west." I also don't think I'd like to see TJ or Jack get less minutes so I'm stuck here.


    And to say that we have lost alot of talent with JO, Tinsley, Al, Jackson, Artest leaving is just absurd. JO was terrible for us. Everytime he got the ball he would destroy our offense. Yea he was a good defender, but I think Roy is already developing into a stronger defender than JO ever was. While Roy isn't as good as JO in his prime, he is better than the JO we had the last few years.Jackson was the worse shooter I've ever seen. Now I cringed everytime he shot the ball. Al was the most over rated guy I've ever seen. Just because he was a ball hog and he scored alot doesn't mean he is more talented. Murphy is having a better year here with us than Al has ever had. Artest is Artest but I still would take Granger 10 times out of 10.

    Only one left is JT. JT wasn't any better of a defender than Ford. He was also way worse at finishing at the basket, was way slower, couldn't create as much as TJ or Jack.

    So IMO, Roy>JO (not JO in hs prime or the rookie Roy, but at this point, I'm gald we have Roy and JO) Murphy or Foster>Harrington(Well Murphy in scoring/rebounds and Foster defense/rebounds), TJ>JT(this one isn't even close, anyone who thinks otherwise please pass that ****), Granger>Artest(in every aspect other than manning up the perimeter but I think Rush has the potential to be that) Dunleavy/Rush>Jackson(and it isn't even close).


    I just don't see where we are really dire for talent other than in the post and I don't think we are so much there since we are actually utilizing Roy. Throw in McRoberts and we are okay.

    We still pay these players millions of dollars and I think if we had a better record people would be saying the exact opposite about the talent thing.
    Last edited by Midcoasted; 12-20-2008, 03:46 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
      TJ Ford's game is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. I just can't stand to watch him use his quickness to drive into trouble where he's too small to find either an open man or a decent shot. The one semi-advantage he's got (quickness in the open court ) turns into his #1 weakness (quickness in the half court). If I were defending him, I'd crowd the ball and prompt him to drive into the heart of the defense every time, because he rarely makes good plays happen in that situation.

      If he ever learns to stay out of the paint against a regular half-court defense, that would be better. Of course, I don't know what he'd do... just pass the ball along the perimeter I guess and any number of NBA PGs could do that.

      I can name 40 or 50 PGs I'd rather have starting. Including Jack and Tinsley. (There, I said it.)

      I'm okay with Jack as the backup.
      (Did I read that someone said that you dont even watch the Pacers that much, or some such statement.)

      One thing about your statement that struck me is that your description of TJ's game is exactly what seems to be the common trend in the NBA today. The Nets are basing their system on doing the same thing. Same for the Bulls with Rose. The Spurs with Parker, Paul in New Orleans.

      I'm curious, and maybe others can tell me, do you just have something against TJ? I'm not his biggest fan, but your opinion of him seems more than a bit extreme.
      Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

        Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
        Name 15 point guard rotations (starter and backup) that you would rather have than TJ and Jack.
        CP3/my grandma
        Deron/my grandma
        Frenchie/my grandma
        Nash/my grandma
        Chauncey/my grandma
        Rajon/my grandma
        Gilbert/my grandma
        Rose/my grandma
        Devin/my grandma
        Baron/my grandma
        JKidd/Barea
        Bibby/Law
        Mo Will/Boobie/Delonte
        Fish/Farmar
        Jameer/AJ

        and quite possibly

        Rafer/Brooks
        Felton/Augustin
        Conley/Lowry

        We're in a Renaissance Golden Age of PGs and neither of ours is getting it done consistently right now.
        Last edited by JayRedd; 12-20-2008, 04:02 PM.
        Read my Pacers blog:
        8points9seconds.com

        Follow my twitter:

        @8pts9secs

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
          CP3/my grandma
          Deron/my grandma
          Frenchie/my grandma
          Nash/my grandma
          Chauncey/my grandma
          Rajon/my grandma
          Gilbert/my grandma
          Rose/my grandma
          Devin/my grandma
          Baron/my grandma
          JKidd/Barea
          Bibby/Law
          Mo Will/Boobie/Delonte
          Fish/Farmar
          Jameer/AJ

          and quite possibly

          Rafer/Brooks
          Felton/Augustin
          Conley/Lowry

          We're in a Renaissance Golden Age of PGs and neither of ours is getting it done consistently right now.



          Mo Williams was a terrible defender and a cancer with Milaukee whos talent was comparable to ours last year. TJ would look great playing next to Lebron too. Put TJ on Orlando and he is an all star.

          All I'm saying is that if you put half of those guys on our team they would struggle.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

            Of JayRedd's list, I'd take Paul, D. Williams, Parker, Nash, Billups, Rondo, Rose, Harris, Davis, and maybe Fisher over TJ. Fisher not for his talent, but for what are his talents relative to TJ's talents. I prefer Fisher's defense and shooting over TJ's speed and quickness. I'm undecided on M. Williams. Depends on if he's a good defender or not. I'm of the opinion that Kidd is a shell of himself now.

            So I guess this means I view TJ Ford as a top 10 to top 12 PG, albiet towards the bottom of either list.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

              Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
              Talent will only get you so far. Most Important the Pacers need to gel as a team. The season is young the Colts were 3-4 @ one point this season and are currently on an eight game win streak. If we can put some W's together we could sneak in the playoffs. We might have a chance of knocking off Detroit/Orlando/Atlanta. Boston & Cleveland are just superior to us right now and will be all season.
              Please don't use the Colts as a reference for what the Pacers can do. 2 completely different situations, and this thread just shows off that point. Pacers are in the bottom 5 in the league arguably in talent. Certainly in the bottom 10. The Colts are on the opposite end of that argument, probably the top 5 in the NFL, and they also have arguably the best (and hottest) player at the most important position in the game (QB).

              I see no Pacer player being anywhere near the best player at his own position, let alone one that is nearly as important as the QB is to football. I see one guy who could be top 5 in his position (Granger) and a bunch of guys who wouldn't even start on a lot of other teams.

              That was just a bad, bad point to try to make.

              -- Steve --

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                Please don't use the Colts as a reference for what the Pacers can do. 2 completely different situations, and this thread just shows off that point. Pacers are in the bottom 5 in the league arguably in talent. Certainly in the bottom 10. The Colts are on the opposite end of that argument, probably the top 5 in the NFL, and they also have arguably the best (and hottest) player at the most important position in the game (QB).

                I see no Pacer player being anywhere near the best player at his own position, let alone one that is nearly as important as the QB is to football. I see one guy who could be top 5 in his position (Granger) and a bunch of guys who wouldn't even start on a lot of other teams.

                That was just a bad, bad point to try to make.

                -- Steve --
                The Colts have UDFAs that come in and play all the time. They send first, second, and sixth round draft picks to the Pro Bowl. The argument is always there for Manning being one of the best ever. It is kinda like having a Jordan or a Shaq in basketball. They don't come around everyday. If you analyze the Colts though Manning can't win the games by himself. Having possibly the best QB of all time can't win you the SB(Marino.) Or maybe the best SG behind Jordan, Reggie. If you look at the Pacers of old what players could you put in the top 5 at their position? Maybe Reggie, and Mark Jackson? I'm struggling to think of anyone else...We need only one player to build around. We have something special with Granger, and alot of talent around him IMO. Give it time...
                Last edited by Midcoasted; 12-21-2008, 03:56 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                  Oh and another thing. Everytime I get a chance to catch a game, I never feel like the other team has so much more "talent" than we do. I feel like we have been playing well this year given the hardest schedule in the NBA. Only in the low post have we been dominated. I like starting Hibbert. If he can get 5 blocks again and again I'll feel alot more confident in the future. We will see where we are after February and have a better idea...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                    I dont think that its the entire pacers that are far less talented. I honestly feel its just our big men. We are probally the very worst team in the league when it comes to talent in our 4 and 5 positions. We do not have a post up player. Our best post defender is not a starter, and our most paid guy would rather sit at the 3 point line rather than mix it up.

                    Our 1-3 positions are actually very stacked imo. We have 2 quality PG's a high engery SG in daniels, a All star in the making in Granger a very very good sg/sf backup in dun and then you throw in rush who play some great D and that makes a good 1-3 team.

                    We just need to work on getting a big man that can score 10-15 points a game in the post and also get us 7 boards and we would be a MUCH better team.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                      Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
                      I dont think that its the entire pacers that are far less talented. I honestly feel its just our big men. We are probally the very worst team in the league when it comes to talent in our 4 and 5 positions. We do not have a post up player. Our best post defender is not a starter, and our most paid guy would rather sit at the 3 point line rather than mix it up.

                      Our 1-3 positions are actually very stacked imo. We have 2 quality PG's a high engery SG in daniels, a All star in the making in Granger a very very good sg/sf backup in dun and then you throw in rush who play some great D and that makes a good 1-3 team.

                      We just need to work on getting a big man that can score 10-15 points a game in the post and also get us 7 boards and we would be a MUCH better team.

                      I totally agree with the 1-3 thing. We are set here IMO. Daniels is playing great. Dunleavy returning would be a huge plus. If we can work a trade for some low post help I'm all for it. But at all cost I want Hibbert and McRoberts to remain. I'd rather see Jeff and Troy stay than Rasho. Could we pull off a Tinsley/Rasho trade for a solid PF or C?(I guess only in dreams. LOL.)

                      It seems like all we need is one dominant beast in the low post and coach to have faith in McRoberts and Hibbert and we could be stacked here too with McRoberts/Hibbert/Foster/Murphy/(insert beast). I don't know if that trade happens but if I know Larry he will work something. Hopefully he doesn't give up too much.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                        Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                        The Colts have UDFAs that come in and play all the time. They send first, second, and sixth round draft picks to the Pro Bowl. The argument is always there for Manning being one of the best ever. It is kinda like having a Jordan or a Shaq in basketball. They don't come around everyday. If you analyze the Colts though Manning can't win the games by himself. Having possibly the best QB of all time can't win you the SB(Marino.) Or maybe the best SG behind Jordan, Reggie. If you look at the Pacers of old what players could you put in the top 5 at their position? Maybe Reggie, and Mark Jackson? I'm struggling to think of anyone else...We need only one player to build around. We have something special with Granger, and alot of talent around him IMO. Give it time...

                        It's the NFL. Every team sends first, second, and sixth round picks out on the field and to the Pro Bowl. *cough*Tom Brady*cough* That does not make the relevance any better.

                        Point is, at their positions Freeney, Mathis, Sanders, Wayne, Clark, Manning, and Saturday are all at, or near the top of the heap when it comes to how good they are at their job. You can focus on Manning all day like you just did, but you contradicted yourself. You're right, Manning CAN'T win all by himself. He has a CAST of talented players. Something the Pacers do not have.

                        Exactly the point I was trying to make, and you're agreeing with it, but still trying to make a debate contrary. I don't know how that can work, honestly.

                        -- Steve --

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          CP3/my grandma
                          Deron/my grandma
                          Frenchie/my grandma
                          Nash/my grandma
                          Chauncey/my grandma
                          Rajon/my grandma
                          Gilbert/my grandma
                          Rose/my grandma
                          Devin/my grandma
                          Baron/my grandma
                          JKidd/Barea
                          Bibby/Law
                          Mo Will/Boobie/Delonte
                          Fish/Farmar
                          Jameer/AJ

                          and quite possibly

                          Rafer/Brooks
                          Felton/Augustin
                          Conley/Lowry

                          We're in a Renaissance Golden Age of PGs and neither of ours is getting it done consistently right now.
                          You sort of ignored the real challenge. The last time I checked, yo grandma didn't play in the NBA.

                          DWill > TJ but Jack > Knight
                          Parker > TJ but Jack > Hill
                          Nash > TJ but Jack > anybody they put at the point.
                          Chauncey > TJ but Jack > ACarter
                          Rajon>TJ but Jack > House
                          Gilbert's not even playing so scratch that one out.
                          Rose = TJ (maybe in a year he'll be better but not yet) and Jack > Hinrich

                          I'm not even going to go through the rest of them because the Pacers TANDEM is better than them all with the exception of Kidd and Barea. Whether or not you think that makes them better overall is a completely different question that no one asked.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                            I don't think Rajon is better than TJ.

                            Call me a hater.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                              Not to say Rondo isn't becoming a very good player, but he did get a dream job for any young point guard.
                              Report: 82% Of Wiseguys Think They're Real Funny

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                I don't think Rajon is better than TJ.

                                Call me a hater.
                                Seconded. Rondo is vastly overated because he plays with the big three, which helps his stats immensely.
                                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                                - ilive4sports

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X