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

We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

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

  • #16
    Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

    I am still confused on why so many of you are willing to trade for a guy who will not be a RFA and will be a FA in one year.

    Sometimes it pays to wait one year and let the guy come to you rather than trading picks/players.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

      Given their number of bigs and their affection for Euro players, we might get him for not much more than the rights to Stanko.

      I am not saying he is great or anything, just practically free. I would like a much bigger backup PF that can play the 5 and elevate and attack the rim when fronted by the likes of Shane Battier, but if he is getting in shape (<260) and costs Stanko and a 2nd, I'd do it. Gives you more than Tyler, IMO
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

        With all due respect, is it that difficult to get a Jeff Foster type player?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

          Originally posted by Ransom View Post
          With all due respect, is it that difficult to get a Jeff Foster type player?
          Yes, it takes a very special player to go 2-10 from the floor in order to rack up 9 ORs. I wouldn't read too much into the fact that Blair doesn't average as many OR's as Foster since he shoots a higher percentage he has fewer opportunities to re-rebound his own missed putbacks.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

            [QUOTE=Gamble1;1477145]

            I am still confused on why so many of you are willing to trade for a guy who will not be a RFA and will be a FA in one year.

            Sometimes it pays to wait one year and let the guy come to you rather than trading picks/players.[/QUOTE


            There is NO guarantee you could get him next year. Getting Blair now gives you a chance to see if he's a good fit for the Pacers. If he is, then he's already acquainted with the team and maybe has some allegence to the Pacers. If you get him now, Bird Rights go with it.

            His salary is less than 1.1 mil. I don't see the Spurs wanting to take salary back, so a 2nd/Stanko and cap would probably get a deal done. Stanko is never going to wear a Pacers uni anymore than Lorbek was. They are trade fodder that costs the Pacers nothing to trade.

            Other teams are making moves to get better. The Pacers can't sit with thumbs up their, and do nothing expecting to repeat the same results or produce better results this coming year. Blair is an asset that can help the 2nd unit and has been a starter on one of the premier NBA teams. At 1 mil he is a bargain that can help the Pacers. He brings more to the table than Hansbrough which is 3 times the cost. Plus if Hans gets injured, vertigo, you have a cheap qualified player already on the roster.
            Last edited by Justin Tyme; 07-10-2012, 11:32 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              There is NO guarantee you could get him next year. Getting Blair now gives you a chance to see if he's a good fit for the Pacers. If he is, then he's already acquainted with the team and maybe has some allegence to the Pacers. If you get him now, Bird Rights go with it.

              His salary is less than 1.1 mil. I don't see the Spurs wanting to take salary back, so a 2nd/Stanko and cap would probably get a deal done. Stanko is never going to wear a Pacers uni anymore than Lorbek was. They are trade fodder that costs the Pacers nothing to trade.

              Other teams are making moves to get better. The Pacers can't sit with thumbs up their, and do nothing expecting to repeat the same results or produce better results this coming year. Blair is an asset that can help the 2nd unit and has been a starter on one of the premier NBA teams. At 1 mil he is a bargain that can help the Pacers. He brings more to the table than Hansbrough which is 3 times the cost. Plus if Hans gets injured, vertigo, you have a cheap qualified player already on the roster.
              If all he cost is Stanko then I would be open to the idea but I think your kidding yourself if thats all he would cost and the only reason I say this is that other teams would most likely offer a lot more than some second round fodder.

              Would Blair be a good fit with a defensive Center in Plumlee? Probably not and the big issue is what it cost to retain him. He will atleast get a MLE offer or something in that range and I would like to follow the Spurs strategy to keep the cost low on the backup players on the team and they way they do that is by keeping their picks and making the most out of them.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                Pssst!! Read this!
                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


                • #23
                  Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                  Originally posted by Ransom View Post
                  With all due respect, is it that difficult to get a Jeff Foster type player?
                  Like all Pacer fans I appreciated Jeff Foster, but the obsession with him on both the front office and fan base is kind of annnoying. When we drafted Hans we heard he was "Jeff Foster with a more developed offensive game". When we drafted Plumlee we heard that he was a "Jeff Foster type of player". With all do respect to Jeff, I'm not sure he i the type of player that will put a team over the top.

                  If championships were won solely through grit and determination we would be perennial title contendors.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                    If all he cost is Stanko then I would be open to the idea but I think your kidding yourself if thats all he would cost and the only reason I say this is that other teams would most likely offer a lot more than some second round fodder.

                    Would Blair be a good fit with a defensive Center in Plumlee? Probably not and the big issue is what it cost to retain him. He will atleast get a MLE offer or something in that range and I would like to follow the Spurs strategy to keep the cost low on the backup players on the team and they way they do that is by keeping their picks and making the most out of them.

                    Who else is going to give a better deal? Stanko would be a 1st round pick now, and the Spurs aren't wanting to take back salary. That's very important. Remember, they supposedly didn't have the money to re-sign Hill. Personally, I find that humorous since they just spent 8.5 mil on re-signing 2 of their own players... Green 4 mil and Diaw 4.5 mil. It's amazing they got Diaw towards the end of the season after trading Hill, and they now are spending 4.5 mil to keep him. As far as I'm concerned, they saw Bird coming and sold him a bill of goods while reaping in Kawhi Leonard.

                    For 1 mil and Stanko does it really matter how Plumlee and Blair fit together? Better question yet, how is Hansbrough and Plumlee going to fit? At least, Blair can play "D", reb, and set picks. Those things fans complained about Hans not being able to do all last season.

                    Even if Blair is nothing but a 1 year rental, like Lou, he comes 3X's cheaper than Lou did, and can SCORE. I see getting Blair for Stanko and Cap as a win win situation, even if it's just for a year. JMOAA

                    Do I think it will happen? No, TPTB aren't that in tune to get it done..

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                      I was reading on twitter that he is trying to lose weight again, WTF?
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                        Who else is going to give a better deal? Stanko would be a 1st round pick now, and the Spurs aren't wanting to take back salary. That's very important. Remember, they supposedly didn't have the money to re-sign Hill. Personally, I find that humorous since they just spent 8.5 mil on re-signing 2 of their own players... Green 4 mil and Diaw 4.5 mil. It's amazing they got Diaw towards the end of the season after trading Hill, and they now are spending 4.5 mil to keep him. As far as I'm concerned, they saw Bird coming and sold him a bill of goods while reaping in Kawhi Leonard.

                        For 1 mil and Stanko does it really matter how Plumlee and Blair fit together? Better question yet, how is Hansbrough and Plumlee going to fit? At least, Blair can play "D", reb, and set picks. Those things fans complained about Hans not being able to do all last season.

                        Even if Blair is nothing but a 1 year rental, like Lou, he comes 3X's cheaper than Lou did, and can SCORE. I see getting Blair for Stanko and Cap as a win win situation, even if it's just for a year. JMOAA

                        Do I think it will happen? No, TPTB aren't that in tune to get it done..
                        So Stanko would be a first round pick now at the age of 25? Even if I would believe that I wouldn't trade a first round pick for a one year rental. Atleast not for a marginal backup pf/c which is what Blair is.

                        Now that Hill and Hibbert are getting paid and the Pacers will be well over the cap the Pacers will have to be wise with not overpaying for marginal bench players. That means holding on to their picks and having them be solid contributors.

                        Stanko is signed until 2015 and by then he will be 28. The same as as Lorbek who will most likely come over the pond to join the Spurs. I can understand why Lorbek wouldn't come over for a crappy Pacers team but now that the Pacers are more than lottery team I fully expect a guy like Stanko to come over and fullfill a role as a solid backup Center.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                          Originally posted by Shade View Post
                          Can we trade Tyler for him?
                          I will kill you. Why must you push my buttons like that?

                          Wouldn't that be the ultimate irony, let's trade down like we should have in the first place only after 3 years of jerking around. And it could have included Holiday, Collison or Lawson too if we'd done it draft night.


                          Blair is not a complete player, he's a great floor space rebounder, uses his hips and leverage to contain people on the glass and to establish his own rebound space. He's got great reach which overcomes the height. His scoring is really hot and cold. Some nights he just cleans up around the rim and has nice inside touch, other nights you get nothing.

                          Decent hands for rebounding, no real shot blocking or rim protections. Great screens.


                          I wanted him over Tyler (by a large margin) because he's a more traditional POWER forward, all muscle, bulk, interior shoving and spacing. If you paired him with Mayo (or similar) and Collison you could have a pretty productive bench.

                          I assume the Spurs are shying away from his defensive limits due to height and quickness. IMO, who cares. He's still a talent upgrade on this roster's bench.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                            So Stanko would be a first round pick now at the age of 25? Even if I would believe that I wouldn't trade a first round pick for a one year rental. Atleast not for a marginal backup pf/c which is what Blair is.

                            Now that Hill and Hibbert are getting paid and the Pacers will be well over the cap the Pacers will have to be wise with not overpaying for marginal bench players. That means holding on to their picks and having them be solid contributors.

                            Stanko is signed until 2015 and by then he will be 28. The same as as Lorbek who will most likely come over the pond to join the Spurs. I can understand why Lorbek wouldn't come over for a crappy Pacers team but now that the Pacers are more than lottery team I fully expect a guy like Stanko to come over and fullfill a role as a solid backup Center.

                            How old was Splitter when he came to the Spurs after they drafted him years previously?

                            Like holding on to marginal picks like Plum Jam to strengthen the Pacers.

                            Like I said the FO getting Blair isn't going to happen. They can't see the forest for the trees. I hope you enjoy another year of Hansbrough as your b/u PF with his 40% FG shooting, and little "D". Maybe he's been working this off season on how to set a proper pick. One can only hope!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              I'd do the trade straight up in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, salaries don't match.

                              Hans 3 mil
                              Blair 1 mil

                              Blair 9.5 PPG... 5.5 Reb... Plays "D", sets picks 2nd... Buford 2 Rd pick 09 draft

                              Hans 9.3 PPG... 4.4 Reb... little "D", sets poor picks... Bird lottery pick 09 draft

                              Hans 3x's the money for equal to less quality.
                              And people wonder why I boo'd loudly at the draft party that night. So frustrating because it's not a shock.


                              And as I've said a million times, save the "but the ACL's were missing" crap because there's never been a player that's failed to play when his ACLs have degenerated away prior to that point. Tearing one that they are using, that's horrible, but developing the leg without them in place is different.

                              Don't trust me, go Google Hines Ward. That's the NFL, WR, planting, cutting, taking hits laterally with the leg/knee bearing most of the force many times per game...Super Bowl MVP and borderline HOF career, and known for being a physical, blocking WR. Now name any player besides Ward or Blair that had this condition and subsequently had a career ending injury a few years into his career because of it. There aren't any, the whole thing was unprecedented when Ward was drafted.

                              Any Blair knee issue was SPECULATIVE because there just weren't any cases besides Hines Ward of people having that situation and being pro-athlete caliber. People just felt like it shouldn't work and therefore had to eventually be a problem.


                              Now the weight - that's different. That is troublesome because it could lead to fatigued, sloppy play.

                              I am still confused on why so many of you are willing to trade for a guy who will not be a RFA and will be a FA in one year.

                              Sometimes it pays to wait one year and let the guy come to you rather than trading picks/players.
                              True, but I also like the idea of getting the help now, taking a look at him with the team prior to the FA situation, and developing a relationship with him too. If you get the Bird rights so much the better.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: We passed ib this guy once, but now he could put us over the top.

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                True, but I also like the idea of getting the help now, taking a look at him with the team prior to the FA situation, and developing a relationship with him too. If you get the Bird rights so much the better.
                                I have no doubt getting Blair into the organization would help us resign him but I see it as a marginal difference that his 3rd down the list. Money and floor time matter most to a young FA and I doubt you would disagree with that.

                                My question to you is simply this. To what end? Adding Blair at his premimum price won't matter much to a small market team like the Pacers. He certainly won't level the scales in favor of the Pacers in the East. He won't put them 2nd in the East and he certainly won't change the outcome of a Heat/Pacer series.

                                The Pacer HAVE TO pay top dollar for a starting 5 and underpay for their bench players. This is of course assuming that Simon won't go into the LT but maybe I am wrong about that. I certainly don't think he will stay in the LT IMO. Would you disagree with this?

                                The biggest bang for the buck is in smart draft picks. Plummle wasn't a smart draft pick. Hansborough wasn't a smart draft pick. Splitter was a smart late first round draft pick. Hill was a smart late first round draft pick.

                                I suggest we follow the model of the Spurs in drafting AND letting guys go when they can be replaced by future draft picks. In a lot of ways the Spurs simply bait a hook with their expiring draftees and get even more value for them by trading them away.

                                The Pacers with the Hill trade took that bait when they should have been the ones like the Spurs getting more value out their own picks and replacing them with other cheaper options.

                                I wanted to believe early on that the Hill trade was a smart move but I can't bring myself to believe that anymore. Trading away 3 guys one of which should have been a lotto pick just wasn't worth Hill.

                                We could have signed him this season IMO and still had 3 assets in Lorbek, Kahwi, Davis Bertanss. Even if guys like JT say that we run the risk of not being able to sign him from the Spurs or he would have been traded,,,OK. Lets assume that does happen. My response to this is SO WHAT?

                                You lost out on the opportunity to overpay for 6th man who can play some pg minutes but is really a sg. The Pacers still don't have a solid point guard and they could have overpaid for OJ Mayo to replace that lost opportunity in signing Hill.

                                So here is my last thought before I stop rambling on and on. IN order for the Pacers to build a contender they need to build up their assets (draft picks/talent) and make smart trades that improve the starting 5 and solidify the bench.

                                Right now we have overpaid for Hill and now the suggestion is to do the same with Blair.. NO thank you.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X