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

Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

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

  • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    Why did you make the jump from just "wing," to now the two wing positions are separated? Which one is Paul George?
    Regardless, you're not getting into the Gee/Butler class even if you do make a relatively arbitrary separation like that.

    Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, DeRozan, Mayo, Crawford, Klay Thompson, J.R. Smith, Redick, Afflalo, Kevin Martin, Beal, Gordon, Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen, Dudley

    That's 18 SG's off the top of my head who are clearly better than either guy. I'm sure there are more.

    LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Igoudala, Turner, Parsons, Marion, Metta, Dunleavy, Beasley, Brewer, Tayshaun

    There's 19 SF's. I'm probably forgetting some of them as well.

    But yes, the 15th best point guard is better than the 15th best SG or SF if you're going to make that separation. If you lump wings together, as you should, they're not even close.

    In respect to Kyrie vs. PG, I also don't understand at all why it matters what position they play in regards to their ability to get their team to a title. Yes, historically, there have been more wings and bigs win titles as a teams best player than point guards. Because there have been more of them that are the best players in the league. The amount of point guards who could be considered a top 3 player at any point in their career is miniscule compared to the amount of wings and bigs who could be considered at that level. If Kyrie is good enough to get into the conversation as a top-3 type player, he's good enough to be the best player on a title winning team. The same applies to PG. The position they play is irrelevant.

    So basically, Kyrie doesn't need a Duncan. He needs a Parker and a Ginobli. Kyrie can be the Duncan.

    Of course, they have the misfortune of playing at the same time as LeBron and KD so both guys probably won't ever be top-3 players at the same time.
    Last edited by BRushWithDeath; 02-20-2013, 09:19 AM.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
      Regardless, you're not getting into the Gee/Butler class even if you do make a relatively arbitrary separation like that.

      Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, DeRozan, Mayo, Crawford, Klay Thompson, J.R. Smith, Redick, Afflalo, Kevin Martin, Beal, Gordon, Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen, Dudley

      That's 18 SG's off the top of my head who are clearly better than either guy. I'm sure there are more.

      LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Igoudala, Turner, Parsons, Marion, Metta, Dunleavy, Beasley, Brewer, Tayshaun

      There's 19 SF's. I'm probably forgetting some of them as well.

      But yes, the 15th best point guard is better than the 15th best SG or SF if you're going to make that separation. If you lump wings together, as you should, they're not even close.

      In respect to Kyrie vs. PG, I also don't understand at all why it matters what position they play in regards to their ability to get their team to a title. Yes, historically, there have been more wings and bigs win titles as a teams best player than point guards. Because there have been more of them that are the best players in the league. The amount of point guards who could be considered a top 3 player at any point in their career is miniscule compared to the amount of wings and bigs who could be considered at that level. If Kyrie is good enough to get into the conversation as a top-3 type player, he's good enough to be the best player on a title winning team. The same applies to PG. The position they play is irrelevant.

      So basically, Kyrie doesn't need a Duncan. He needs a Parker and a Ginobli. Kyrie can be the Duncan.

      Of course, they have the misfortune of playing at the same time as LeBron and KD so both guys probably won't ever be top-3 players at the same time.
      You can't simply lump them together. Some play both but many 3's are to slow or lack the lateral mobility to guard 2 guards, and many 2's are to short to play 3. P.G. has neither of these weaknesses.

      Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

      Comment


      • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        Regardless, you're not getting into the Gee/Butler class even if you do make a relatively arbitrary separation like that.

        Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, DeRozan, Mayo, Crawford, Klay Thompson, J.R. Smith, Redick, Afflalo, Kevin Martin, Beal, Gordon, Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen, Dudley

        That's 18 SG's off the top of my head who are clearly better than either guy. I'm sure there are more.

        LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Igoudala, Turner, Parsons, Marion, Metta, Dunleavy, Beasley, Brewer, Tayshaun

        There's 19 SF's. I'm probably forgetting some of them as well.

        But yes, the 15th best point guard is better than the 15th best SG or SF if you're going to make that separation. If you lump wings together, as you should, they're not even close.

        In respect to Kyrie vs. PG, I also don't understand at all why it matters what position they play in regards to their ability to get their team to a title. Yes, historically, there have been more wings and bigs win titles as a teams best player than point guards. Because there have been more of them that are the best players in the league. The amount of point guards who could be considered a top 3 player at any point in their career is miniscule compared to the amount of wings and bigs who could be considered at that level. If Kyrie is good enough to get into the conversation as a top-3 type player, he's good enough to be the best player on a title winning team. The same applies to PG. The position they play is irrelevant.

        So basically, Kyrie doesn't need a Duncan. He needs a Parker and a Ginobli. Kyrie can be the Duncan.

        Of course, they have the misfortune of playing at the same time as LeBron and KD so both guys probably won't ever be top-3 players at the same time.
        I completely agree that the position doesn't define ones ability to get a ring. People love to point to wings as the ring-getters of late. Well ten years ago it was bigs. Before that it was wings again. Before that it was little guys. It just goes through cycles, and changes every 5-6 years or so. Point being, don't look at stuff like that and determine "well, a PG hasn't won a ring in 6 years, while wings have dominated; therefore PGs are unable of carrying their team to a title." It's a false theory. And like I said earlier in this thread, lil guys suffer from pure probability, because at almost any given time in league history there is a relatively low percentage of dominant PGs compared to wings. Right now we're at a low point of PGs and bigs... wings are the big constituent these days. We don't know who's going to dominate the league 5 years from now. I could see LeBron still being a factor... maybe Durant is hauling in ring after ring? Maybe PG ascends to heights none of us can predict? Maybe Kyrie is hauling in his second ring in two years? We don't know. I'm not even trying to predict that. I'm just saying right now and for the foreseeable future, Kyrie Irving is the Andrew Luck of the NBA --- the clear and obvious best player to enter the league in a number of years. He was the top choice in college... in the draft... in his rookie season, and people can look at him and say "Yea, that guy is special." And saying that is no slight to PG, that's like saying "Russell Wilson sucks"... well no, that's not true, in fact Russell Wilson is a beast and a stud and I could completely see him winning a ring before Luck. But Luck, to me is still the blue-chip, high pedigree talent. Russell Wilson is still a very, very, very, very, very good young player, with a chance to be something special, and who like PG was also under-rated and under-appreciated early on and grew into something special.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-20-2013, 01:14 PM.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

          Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
          Why did you make the jump from just "wing," to now the two wing positions are separated? Which one is Paul George?
          Good point. I made this point because there are some players that are pretty clearly SGs (Bryant, Wade), some that are pretty clearly SFs (Gay, Granger, Pierce) and some players that tend to blur the lines (Paul George, Iguodala).
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

            Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
            Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, DeRozan, Mayo, Crawford, Klay Thompson, J.R. Smith, Redick, Afflalo, Kevin Martin, Beal, Gordon, Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen, Dudley

            That's 18 SG's off the top of my head who are clearly better than either guy. I'm sure there are more.

            LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Igoudala, Turner, Parsons, Marion, Metta, Dunleavy, Beasley, Brewer, Tayshaun

            There's 19 SF's. I'm probably forgetting some of them as well.
            I see. Even if we were to lump them all together as wings.

            Would you take Redick, Afflalo, Beal, Gordon (not prime Gordon, this Gordon), Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen (again, this season's Ray Allen), Dudley, Metta, Dunleavy, Brewer, Beasley and Tayshaun (again, this year's Tayshaun) over Conley and Hill?
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

              An interesting point of contention might be Irving VS. PG on the court. I don't see Irving being tasked to guard PG simply on size... but I could see PG being tasked to guard Irving, because he's shown capable of guarding smaller, quicker guards. PGs ability to defend almost any wing player is astounding. His length, speed, height, ability to stay in front, predict passing lanes, etc, might not be matched in the league right now.

              The difference with Irving, though... is that he's not like LeBron --- brute strength, power, speed. He's not like Derrick Rose --- speed, strength, shiftiness.

              Irving possesses little of that. His game is completely based on him breaking you down off the dribble using angles, leverage, momentum --- in other words... his mind, and his body control and quickness, good decision-making, good shooter. I could honestly see Irving being able to have success against PG. I could see him breaking PG down off the dribble. Now, that said, I could also see PG giving Kyrie fits here and there. But of all the wing players in the league, I think Kyrie might have more success than most people against PG. That's how strong his 1-on-1 game is. Kyrie isn't just 1-on-1 though... he often breaks down his defender, only to find a cutter or an open man... once he breaks you down, he goes in so many different directions. I am very excited and interested to see what kind of team they put around him. Right now I don't feel like he has any team around him, tbo. And that's one of my concerns with Kyrie is that he landed with such an inept organization, historically speaking. He may never reach the heights he's capable of as long as he's in Cleveland.

              Kyrie to me has the highest pure raw skillset of any PG in the league, and that's including CP3 and Deron Williams and Rondo. Right now I'd place those three guys above him, but I don't think that's going to be the case for long. In two years, I think we'll be referring to Kyrie as the best PG in the world.
              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-20-2013, 01:47 PM.
              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

              Comment


              • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                I would have said Rose is more skilled than Kyrie, but with the knee now who knows. Kyrie might have the best raw tool kit. BUt you could also make the case that outside of Lebron, PG has the best raw toolkit of any wing.


                Comment


                • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                  Yea, PG does have a very complete skillset, but the only skill of his that I consider "elite" is his defense. His offense is still coming and while effective, far from "elite". He can be shut down or thrown off his game on occasion, and he's not yet at a point where he can score at will at any time.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    I see. Even if we were to lump them all together as wings.

                    Would you take Redick, Afflalo, Beal, Gordon (not prime Gordon, this Gordon), Terry, Tony Allen, Ray Allen (again, this season's Ray Allen), Dudley, Metta, Dunleavy, Brewer, Beasley and Tayshaun (again, this year's Tayshaun) over Conley and Hill?
                    A couple of them possibly but now you are comparing a 12-15ish PG to a 25-35ish wing. What is the point?
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                      A couple of them possibly but now you are comparing a 12-15ish PG to a 25-35ish wing. What is the point?
                      Here are the players you mentioned that I consider clearly better than Hill and Conley:

                      Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Iguodala.

                      I consider it a wash with everyone else that I didn't mention the previous post. If you count those players, they are 15th.

                      So, we're essentialy comparing the 15th PG with the 15th wing (combined SGs and SFs).
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        Here are the players you mentioned that I consider clearly better than Hill and Conley:

                        Wade, Kobe, Harden, Joe Johnson, LeBron, Durant, Melo, Pierce, George, Gay, Josh Smith, Deng, Batum, Galinari, Iguodala.

                        I consider it a wash with everyone else that I didn't mention the previous post. If you count those players, they are 15th.

                        So, we're essentialy comparing the 15th PG with the 15th wing (combined SGs and SFs).
                        I cannot grasp what point you're trying to make. Doesn't saying that the 15th best wing is about the same as the 15th best point guard validate that position is irrelevant to the discussion?
                        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                        -Lance Stephenson

                        Comment


                        • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                          I cannot grasp what point you're trying to make. Doesn't saying that the 15th best wing is about the same as the 15th best point guard validate that position is irrelevant to the discussion?
                          If you're lumping together SGs and SFs as wings then it is irrelevant. If you don't, then it isn't.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                            Kyrie Irving and Paul George are both amazing young basketball players. We should consider ourselves extremely lucky to have one of them on our team.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                              Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
                              Kyrie Irving and Paul George are both amazing young basketball players. We should consider ourselves extremely lucky to have one of them on our team.
                              Agreed
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Best Young All-Star: PG or Kyrie?

                                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                                If you're lumping together SGs and SFs as wings then it is irrelevant. If you don't, then it isn't.
                                Do you even know which side of the argument you are on anymore? You should run for President of whatever country you live in. If your European politics are anything like American politics, your flip flopping would be perfect.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X