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

The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

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

  • The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

    Since the ultimate goal is to eventually contend for a championship I thought we could discuss legitimate ways the Pacers could contend for a championship in the future, whether that is 3 years or up to 6 years from now.

    **Cliff notes

    We'll base this on the talent we have and what we could possibly get in the future.

    Please let's try to keep this as rational as possible with no hyperbolic statements...

    So just follow along with my thought process and tell me where I'm wrong.

    I thought the best way to look at how we could possibly contend with the best teams in the NBA is look at the Celtics. They don't have one of top 10 most dynamic players in the NBA so if we could understand what they do to be a championship caliber team, than I think we would understand what the Pacers would need to be one as well.

    The Celtics were able to win with an effective point guard, a great shooting two guard, and a borderline superstar small forward who could create on his own. This was all complimented with an all-world interior defense. They depended on great chemistry with each other which mean very unselfish play on the offensive side, and a fiercely competitive defense.

    They key I don't think was in the over all talent really. I mean take Paul Pierce's play. The guy wasn't scoring a whole lot, he wasn't near the offensive threat he was in years prior but I think he managed to be a much more effective player than those he played against because of the over all package. For instance if we were to compare Pierce to someone like Joe Johnson we could see a clear difference in why Pierce's teams were competing with the best and Joe Johnson's weren't.

    Pierce uses great shot selection and unselfish play to produce a net positive to his teams performance. He also hustles on defense, contesting every shot and while he may only produce 18 ppg, he is a highly efficient scorer.

    Joe Johnson on the other hand doesn't get to the line a lot, and doesn't shoot a high fg% and while just out of physical talent alone Johnson is probably a more talented player, but Pierce ends up being a much more valuable teammate.

    The other keys are Allen sticking to his game which means getting good open looks and on the defensive side he hustles contributing to a great team defense.

    Kevin Garnett was and is the anchor to the team on defense, rebounding, and playing long, tall and big down low. He did all the good things that a big man needs to do to win a championship. I think it is key that every team that wants to compete has someone like Garnett- Someone who can defend most big men, contest layups, and rebound well. On paper someone like Chris Bosh may be a better player for instance than Garnett, but when it comes to actually winning, you have to have someone who can rebound and defend. With big Perkins down there and KG they were long and could contest every shot in the paint.

    It is also worth noting that Rondo has now turned into a superstar but really he is just now showing he's that guy. For the most part Rondo has been a solid point guard with a sub-par jump shot that didn't make any mistakes.

    The point I'm trying to get at is, the Celtics didn't need a big name superstar who could score 28 points per game. They didn't need a super star point guard who could average 13 assists and 20 points per game. What they had is a team that played great defense as a team, and they played solid offense. They had one player who could iso, they had an option in the post in KG, they had a great jump shooter, and they had a distributing point guard.

    What the Pacers need is to wisely assemble a team of players who can full fill the necessary rolls. I think this much is obvious but sometime we all ignore in our some what short sited view of the teams potential. As an example, most of this board was quite upset when we didn't get OJ Mayo. I don't intend to beat a dead horse, but if we were looking at the future of this franchise- OJ is not a guy that could come in to play real good defense and score at a highly effective level.

    So without further ado, let's look at the Pacers current starting lineup and see what each position needs in order to beat the best.

    Point guard:

    As was mentioned early I think we need to recognize that while there may be an immediate need for this position, that need is not a superstar. We need someone who can effectively run the fast break, one that can penetrate, and one that effectively run the PnR.

    On the defensive side of the ball our point guard has to be able to play good perimeter defense which means contesting those 20 foot jump shots as well as three pointers. They also need to do a somewhat decent job making it tough on the many slashing point guards in the league right now.

    With Darren Collison offensively I think he has shown every ability in the world to be our starting point of the future. Many have criticized his play making ability but I believe it is unfair. DC does an excellent job penetrating, he does well on the fast break, and as long as the team can play together setting good screens for eachother and moving well without the ball, you'll see DC play consistent on the offensive side. He'll never be a Rondo or Nash, but can produce like Tony Parker offensively? Absolutely.

    The major problem with DC's game is his defense and consistency. He plays average defense at best, and as such an inexperienced player we see him making a lot of careless mistakes that really hurt our team. Careless turnovers such as lazy passes, and poor ball handling.

    As it does traditionally take a point guard longer to reach their potential I think it would be appropriate for us to expect consistent play on the offensive side of the court in DC's third season, but I don't think he'll ever be the answer because I feel it is a tad bit optimistic to think he'll ever be able to defend the position at a high enough level.

    However, I will say for the next couple of years, I think we can keep DC at the starting lineup running the offense until we think we can acquire the right PG for us. Really, so long as the other rolls are full filled on this team? I think DC would be good enough to help this team get a number 4 or three seed. The difference in winning a championship I think would depend on whether we could get the right man for the job. It is a lot easier said then done, and I don't think it is worth giving up someone like Danny Granger for instance in getting that guy. More on that later.

    Now it is worth mentioning that it might be a possibility to deal both Rush and DC in a package deal to get a much more solid point guard over the summer. I cannot think of a decent prospect, but I would completely support that effort. But in conclusion, I think DC is the short term answer at point guard, and he certainly won't hurt the teams growth in the next couple of seasons.

    Shooting guard:

    I think this is our biggest question because I believe the Pacers are depending on Paul George to be a solid scorer on offense. One that can put up his 20 a game but most importantly he needs to do it at efficient level buy penetrating, getting to the line and hitting that 20 foot jumper. There are a plethora of guards that can throw up 20 in the league, but very few who can do it buy shooting a high TS%. Since we have no one that can score when the offense breaks down, Paul needs to be able to score at will. Essentially, he needs to be our Paul Pierce.

    Defensively I have no question that he may in the following years be considered one of the best players in the league. I don't even think it is remotely outlandish. He's quick, he's long, and he's extremely aggressive.


    Small forward:

    I think there is little question that Granger is the answer at SF. There has been a lot of criticism of Granger all season and maybe for good reason, but a lot of it is miss placed. We have to realize that Granger is full filling a roll that he is not equipped for. He's not a superstar, he's not the best at creating his own shot, and I think it really helps him when the rest of the team is playing well.

    More importantly, the advantages of having Granger are his many positives. He doesn't cost very much. He's at I think 10 million a year right now and he's among the best at his position. I think once we focus the ball away from Granger and play to his strengths you'll see a much more effective and more efficient play. He needs to play off the ball. When you have a great shot such as his, he'll be better utilized looking for open spots on the floor and spreading the D.

    It is also worth noting that despite what people "think" they can see, Granger plays hard, he wants to be here, and he wants to win. That's what he cares about. He's not egotistical as some of the more dramatic on this board contend. He doesn't care about taking the most shots as most will say when the team plays a bad game, I think he is someone you can win with. He does play good defense, although it lacks sometimes when things are falling a part, for the most part I can point to some absolutely great games defensively that Granger has had this season.

    Power Forward

    This I believe will be our biggest weakness. And let me be clear- I love Tyler. I think he is going to be a contributing Pacer for a long time but I think the flaws he has in his game would keep the Pacers from ever actually contending for a title.

    He is undersized and doesn't play good enough D. He plays average at best on the ball defense, and he can in no way help the Pacer protect the basket in the paint. He's just not that guy. I also think it is overly optimistic to think he could ever grow into that guy.

    The nice thing is, I believe he'll be a very effective 6th man for years to come and help the Pacers have much needed depth. But if we are to ever win a championship, we need a legitimate defensive presence down low.

    Tyler doesn't rebound well either. This is another problem for the Pacers. We need someone who can box out well, and help us control the boards. Until that happens, the Pacers will continue to give up offensive rebounds late in the game to superior opponents such as the Bulls and Celtics.

    This is where if we are honest we recognize things are a little bleak for the Pacers. There isn't a lot out there for us in the free agent market this summer. If we were somehow able to snatch Tyson Chandler I think he would be an excellent addition. He'd full fill our needs nicely. In fact, with the addition of Chandler, the Pacers could actually run sort of an odd rotation that got Tyler in the game more often for offensive touches, while Chandler could play less minutes too keep him healthy and ready for playoff runs.

    With Tyson the Pacers would be an absolute force in the paint defensively. I don't think Tyson is a legitimate option as Cuban will ensure they sign him.

    Center:

    Roy has had a roller coaster ride all season long. A couple good games followed by several turrible games has been the theme. However, when he has played well, he shows us how effective he can be. He rebounds well, blocks shots, and scores efficiently.

    Roy has been improving each season so I see no reason why he won't improve this off season.

    What will really decide if the Pacers front court can help this team compete for a championship is if in Roy's 4th season, he can play at a consistent level every night. He needs to be a solid 15/10 (per 36) every night without fail. I don't think it is too much to expect that next season. He needs to bulk up next season so he's not pushed around so easy on defense. He also needs to be able to finish strong every time.

    If Roy cannot be a solid presence on a nightly basis I believe that is when we start questioning if we can win with Roy in the starting lineup, and start looking for someone who can full fill that role.

    What will really help Roy play the same on any given night is if we are able to get someone to rebound and defend well at power forward. This would change the entire dynamic of the Pacers as a team.


    Conclusion

    With the talent the Pacers have on the roster right now I don't think they are two far off from competing but there are some big if's.

    Can Roy play consistent next season? Can we sign the answer at power forward? We certainly have the cap space. And will Paul George develop into our number one scoring threat? If the answer to all of those questions is yes, I believe the Pacers will win anywhere from 45-50 games with in two years. Add in the fact that if we are able to find a solid point guard sometime in the next 4 years or so, the Pacers would have the talent to beat any team in the NBA.

    Thoughts?

    **Cliff notes**

    The reason for this thread is put a positive spin on things... Right now it seems everyone goes from loving the team one night to hating them the next. I don't understand it, and think it is rather counter productive! We love watching them, they're young, they aren't quite at the talent level to compete... and as we all know just a few pieces here and there can completely change whether a team is hovering at .500 or competing for a trip to the NBA finals!
    Last edited by mattie; 03-22-2011, 05:58 AM.

  • #2
    Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

    Nice post and maybe I'll have clearer thinking after the season. But right now I have no idea about this team and about these players. Not sure any of these players will ever be capable of winning a championship. I just don't know. I just don't see a straight line from these players to having a championship caliber team like we did from 1994 - 2000.

    We have some nice players, but I don't see any position where I would say, OK, we are good enough there to win it all.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

      We don't have a single player who's on par with either of the Celtics' top 4 when they are healthy.
      Last edited by ballism; 03-22-2011, 09:59 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

        Great post, but unfortunately I think it will take divine intervention or otherwise really bizarre circumstances ala 2004 for the Pacers to ever win a championship. I honestly never expect to see it happen.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

          I like many of your suggestions/thoughts. The thing that is hard to ever figure out is what is needed.... as things change. I like the Celts model too, but if you change even one thing it probably doesn't work.

          For example, Garnett is a defensive backbone now, but he still has the pedigree of a league MVP (Can't remember if he ever really won it, but still). Pierce was a chucker before he had a good group around him, imo. Ray Allen was a big time scorer who has the selflessness and understanding to step back when needed.

          My point is that its a delicate balance of chemistry and ability.

          I think almost everything you say is arguably right, but if I had one theme to hang my hat on, its defense.

          It changes from highschool to college to pro. In Highschool its easy to find defenders willing to do the dirty work, in College I've been amazed watching teams defend in the Tourney so far. Watching Pro ball you don't have lock down defenders or rarely so.

          I'd argue you have to build almost the opposite as you would at the lower levels when you look at an NBA team.

          Rondo and Garnett are 1st team NBA caliber defenders. Perkins, imo, was maybe the best or at least one of the best low post defenders in the league, while in Boston.

          I'd also suggest you can find scorers readily in the NBA, as you've alluded to, not 20 point scorers, like you mentioned, but 10 -15 points a night guys grow on trees, I'd guess.

          With this said, I'd build around two or three elite defenders AND 1 stud clutch scorer.

          Tony Allen, to me, has put Memphis on the map as adding this elite defender for Memphis, Shane Battier did the same early on in Houston.

          Maybe Paul George is the start of finding an elite defender at the wing position.

          After the 1 stud clutch scorer you still need a Steve Kerr guy who can hit a knock down jumper, if needed. Or another words a role playing clutch scorer or scorers, but again, they don't need to be stars, just have that skill.

          Anyway, thats my take and much repeats what you already said.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

            This post should be re-visted once the season is officially over. While it's a wish and a star, I don't feel like talking as if it's over this season before we have been actually eliminated. Until that occurs, this season could still mathematically result in a championship, and that is a part of the reason I watch.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

              I disagree with you post

              PG > PF is the biggest need for this team. Mc Roberts is a better distributor/ ball handler than DC. DC is not a championship caliber PG.

              Our biggest need may be outside shooting if the Pacers don't resign MDJ and DC does not help with that. I would love to be able to draft a PG (Knight of UK) but odds are he is gone by when the Pacers draft @ 15th.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                Too early to tell what we'll need with this group.

                My guess is, we'll need two guys that are a least as good as Danny, and PG will become one of them.

                I agree completely, the board is more up and down then the team.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                  I think is almost impossible to use the Celtics as an example, as somebody already said, neither one of our players are close to the big 4 when healthy, one team I think the Pacers could mold them self to, is the Chicago Bulls, all we need is an elite or close to elite Point guard and we are in business(not saying that is easy) with DC as the PG we won't be able to do anything.

                  Here is how the comparison goes:

                  Rose>>> DC
                  Korver or whoever they have< Paul George/Brush/DJ
                  Deng< Danny
                  Boozer> Hansbrough
                  Noah= Hibbert

                  As you can see maybe experience or free agents signings could make us an equal and balance team like the Bulls.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                    Well...
                    In my opinion, we should keep our eyes on Darren. His decision making isn't good yet... but I'm sure it'll improve. He's a guy we should follow next year.
                    Tyler, I like him. His offensive game is good. But he really must improve his defense and rebounding in order to be a good player.
                    Roy will probably improve more next season, mostly with shot selection/turnovers, but I don't think he'll make a huge leap to become an all star or anything like that.
                    Paul George... I'm the only one on this board who isn't so sure he'll turn into a superstar as some people here claim... Maybe he will, every rookie has a chance... But in my opinion he's a pretty standard rookie, his defense is quite remarkable though, he gets plenty of blocks and even more steals. His offense will improve eventually, but how far will it improve?
                    Danny, even though he's not as good this year, is still an amazing offensive player. His defense is underrated too, I mean come on, our team defense is bad, and it seems Danny gets the blame for it, but that's not the case

                    So basically if Tyler, Roy, DC, George improve, and Danny puts up great numbers like in his MIP year, we could make it to top.. 5.. 4.. of east
                    Originally posted by Piston Prince
                    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                      One detail not yet mentioned is that the Celtics managed a rare feat by winning the championship without their core having played together for multiple years, which is in line with Larry's oft-stated line about wanting the guys to get playoff experience.

                      This thread may see a lot of traffic come summer, but for now let me keep with its positive intention by suggesting that we all watch the remainder of the season with the idea that many of our players will remain AND grow with the team. One or two off-season additions along with that growth may prove transformational, and patience + passion make us better fans.


                      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                        I had a hard time getting past the thought that the Celtics built their championship team without a superstar. In fact, I think that is a totally false assessment.

                        When the Celtics traded for Kevin Garnett he was a superstar and definitely one of the top 10 players in the NBA. He was just a few years removed from winning the MVP award and considered to be still in his prime. He's a multiple All NBA First Team member and a winner of the Defensive Player of the Year award. He's a 14 time All-Star (he had played in 10 straight before joining Boston).

                        If the Celtics are the model to follow, the Pacers need to acquire Dwight Howard and Monta Ellis (or Kevin Martin), and then find a great defensive pass-first PG. In other words, it's going to take a lot to get the Pacers into title contention.

                        Right now the model the Pacers are following is that of Atlanta and Memphis. If they only add one more All-Star level player that is about as good as they are going to be. You really need at least 3 if not 4 All-Star level players to have a chance to win a championship.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                          We need players who can defend at an above average level, at the least, at every position. Without that, a championship is a far fetched dream.
                          Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                            If we save up our cap space for 2012 offseason, we're gonna have a lot more options to build this team into a solid playoff contender or we can make a few decent deals.

                            In addition, we have some young players with the potential to be something special.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The Pacers future, and what is needed to win a championship

                              we need more players that don't care about scoring so much. players that would rather win than score points. these players are hard to find though, because the best way to make a name for yourself is scoring points.
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X