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

Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

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

  • Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

    A late start for this year's draft articles as we begin this year on Saturday June 14, just about a week and a half from draft night 2014. With the Pacers not scheduled until pick #57 this year, my focus will be multi-pronged. First, I'll try and pick out players who I think might make the league at all, who will be picked at or around #57 that I like for Indiana. Secondly, I'll identify guys who might be worth making a small trade up into the earlier stages of round 2 for, and then lastly I'll try and see if there is anyone worth trading for that would likely be available in the mid teens or so, in the unlikely event that Indiana chooses to trade a starter for a pick in that range.

    Trying to scout players more in this range is not nearly as fun as scouting first round talent, because of the sheer volume of players to try and focus on and because these type of guys have such a high failure rate. And as always, I will not be reviewing any foreign players from overseas due to my own lack of familiarity and tape available of those types of players.....and I say that even though I think the most likely scenario for Indiana to actually execute is to take a "draft and stash" type of player.

    Having said all of that, I'll only be writing about players who I think have a legitimate shot of both being selected by Indiana and who actually can make our team.....that narrows the pool a ton, I can promise you.

    So without further ado, let us take a look at this year's first prospect to under the microscope, Louisville point guard Russ Smith.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Smith was a national championship level player for Rick Pitino's Louisville Cardinals, playing in big games and making multiple deep runs in the NCAA tournament in his years in college, winning the national championship 2 years ago. Born April 19, 1991, Smith turned 23 years old last spring, making him a somewhat older prospect to evaluate. A Brooklyn native, Smith often displays that typical New York swagger and bravado during games, which is both a strength and a weakness for him.

    Smith measures in at 6'1 in shoes, with a 6'3 1/2 wingspan, putting him on the smaller side of what a typical NBA point guard would be at. More concerning though is his extremely thin build, as Smith weighs in at right around 160lbs. Whoever drafts Smith will have some major work to do in building up his overall strength and bulk with a solid diet and weight plan to make him a playable commodity with an NBA long term future. But if Smith does manage to add bulk and strength while maintaining his very high level of athleticism and quickness, then I do believe he has the talent and "mojo" to be an effective NBA player.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Smith managed to average 19.3 ppg for the highly ranked Cardinals last season, which put him among the highest scoring point guards in the country. "Point guard" is really a misnomer for Smith at this point, because his compass is aimed directly 10 feet high at the rim, instead of trying to play a more traditional point guard role. Smith is a high usage scorer who really just passes in 9-1-1 situations, at least at this point in his career. Smith is able to hang in the air for a long time, and twist his body and torso to get up (and often make) tough off balance shots. Much of his shot selection in college was cringeworthy for an old school coach, and in fact Rick Pitino coined the phrase "Russdiculous" to describe his young guard.

    I rated Smith as actually a very very good jump shooter form wise, as even though he only shot 33.3% from deep, that is mainly because he took so many horrible guarded shots. In a much more limited role at the NBA level, playing in a more controlled way I think he can eventually be a 40% 3point shooter on open spot up situations. Smith is particularly good at shooting the corner 3 in my opinion, as he seems to have been taught well how to slide into the vision of his teammates into those areas of the floor. While I do not have stats to back up that assertion, you can believe that the NBA analytic departments do.

    In transition offense is where Smith stands out the most as an offensive weapon. He is both a blur with the ball from an athletic standpoint, but he is also very efficient with the ball. On tape, what stands out to me the most is how far he pushes the ball ahead of himself with the dribble.....he covers a HUGE amount of terrain with the minimum amount of bounces. He has good wiggle to his dribble, and has all of the prerequisite moves, and his "in and out" dribble (or fake crossover if you like that term better) is a major weapon for him already. Any outlet to Smith has the potential for a quick offensive chance to score in transition or in early offense.

    Of course, the reason Smith isn't a first round pick is the fact that he sometimes plays with the court vision of Helen Keller. Smith is a tunnel vision point guard who drives to score, not to draw the defense. Now, being a smart kid like I believe him to be, I do believe that at the NBA level he will moderate that style somewhat against the superior athletes in the pro game....but there will be a learning curve. Why I think Smith has a chance is that I do believe that, if he improves his vision and willingness to find others instead of keeping the ball, that he has the prerequisite quickness and ability to pass from a physical standpoint.....in other words, he is GOOD enough to do it, but WILL he do it, that is the question.

    Like many young guards he gets into the air too often with no real plan (except to shoot in his case), which causes him to turn the ball over too much. His assist to TO ratio in college was even, but I do believe he has a chance to improve that in the NBA playing in a less demanding role and with some coaching and maturity.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I like how Smith can use his off hand, both to pass and to finish his own play. While he often puts himself in bad spots with unwise moves into crowds, he can bail himself out by being able to use his left hand to finish over size or to make difficult passes in crowds. Because he is small and rail thin, he has to avoid contact when he can by contorting himself around the defense, lacking the size to score THROUGH contact. There will be very few "and 1's" in Smith's future. Bigger guys around the rim can just engulf him and swallow him whole. What he will need to do is to first gain major strength so he can score even while being jostled, then because he can score, people will naturally have to help, and at that point he will need to learn to pass instead of taking tough shots.

    Smith, as I mentioned earlier, has really good form on his jump shots MOST of the time. As long as he only takes open shots with a lot of room to get his shot off, I think that will be a weapon for him. He has a nice and tight high release on his jumper, though he takes a bit long to load up on a longer set shot off a spot up. I love his balance when he takes open 1 and 2 dribble pull ups, and he brings the ball up through the window with good timing and rhythm.

    Now like many smaller and "weaker" players from a strength standpoint, when he is fatigued his mechanics can go astray. When he loses his legs he will "push" the ball instead of shoot it, not hold his follow through, and kind of thumb the ball at the target, giving it a screwball type of effect. When Smith misses, he often misses badly, which makes people think he is a worse shooter that he actually is. That, and the lack of size to shoot over a good "contest" lower his percentages. It is crucial for his long term potential that Smith learns what a good shot is, and what one isn't.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Defensively, Smith has some potential to guard a specific type of opponent, i.e. one with extreme quickness and/or one who might struggle with full court extreme ball pressure.

    Smith has very quick feet, stays in a stance well when he is on the ball, uses his hands well, and seems to really ENJOY picking people up and getting in their grill. He is a pesky defender in the open court, capable of getting on the ball steals or at least occupying time on the shot clock and wearing an opponent down over time.

    Of course, his quickness can only make up for his lack of strength and size so much. He fights hard to get over ball screens, and he is so slinky and quick than he can be tough to screen....but still, his lack of strength in getting over NBA players ballscreens is going to be an issue....size can engulf him. On the other hand, if you can place him to match him up with an opponent who isn't a big threat to COME OFF a ball screen, then you can mitigate that to some degree.

    I think he projects as a pesky defensive option for 10-15 minutes a night maximum, anything more than and he will likely get exposed. He will work hard for you defensively and be "defensively consistent", which is helpful to a coaching staff. His level of quickness can't be taught, and he plays hard.....he will just be limited, and will be somewhat matchup dependent.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So what do we have in this confident and brash young guard?

    At pick #57, you are looking for someone who can make your team and perhaps give it something that it doesn't currently have....or have the pick give you something your team has for a cheaper price. Can Smith do that for Indiana?

    Yes, I think he can.

    As a 3rd point guard I think he makes some sense for us. High character guy, very quick, well taught, and a better shooter than advertised. He would be a defensive option perhaps against a Teague or a Wall perhaps in short stints, which we currently don't have. And what shortcomings he has, I think his confidence and swagger can mitigate that to some degree.

    If he is your true backup point guard (which is his ceiling, in time) then you'll have good night and bad nights with him depending on the matchups and the particular system you are using, and depending of course on who is on the team with him. As a 3rd point guard who you can only play in certain spots and matchups, I think he can be ok.

    At #57, if I am Indiana, I think Smith is good enough to take Donald Sloan's place on our roster. If that is the choice they make on draft night, it would not be anything to be excited about, but it would be a solid choice. Smith's long term value depends somewhat on how much strength he can put on and how frequent his offensive explosions can be. At his peak, I think he might be a guy who can explode off the bench for you and score points in bunches, about once every week or 2 weeks or so.

    Do I think he is good enough to trade up for from #57? No, I don't.....but I wouldn't be upset if we stand pat and take him, as he would be a solid choice.

    Going forward in this series, I'll continue to look for guys who have value, and maybe find some guys who might make more of a real difference than a 3rd point guard could.

    NBA comparable: Jose Barea (if he maxes out)

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird

  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

    I wouldn't mind it if he's our pick. Like you said though I wouldn't be terribly excited about it either.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

      Doesn't sound like the type of player the Pacers need at pg. At least he isn't afraid to shoot like GHill.
      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

        I wouldn't mind Russdiculous. He has shortcomings. Size, poor shot selection. But the guys is FAST and can get any where he wants on the.court. As TBird started he has SWAGGER and is confident. A 10 to 15 minute a night is about right. Russ can poor in the points when he's is on and can sink a ship when he isn't. If he is available I would take him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

          I watched a lot of U of L BB the last few years. I liked Russ, but at the sametime he's 3rd string possibly in time capable of being b/u PG. With out a doubt he has speed and quickness, but he has a scorers mentality. He'd be cheaper than Sloan and IMO could do a nice job for the Pacers as a 3rd PG.

          I wouldn't mind if the Pacers drafted him, but I'd look for something more, if possible, at #57. I still like and wish the Pacers could get Isaiah Canaan from last years draft that sits at the end of Houston's bench.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            I watched a lot of U of L BB the last few years. I liked Russ, but at the sametime he's 3rd string possibly in time capable of being b/u PG. With out a doubt he has speed and quickness, but he has a scorers mentality. He'd be cheaper than Sloan and IMO could do a nice job for the Pacers as a 3rd PG.

            I wouldn't mind if the Pacers drafted him, but I'd look for something more, if possible, at #57. I still like and wish the Pacers could get Isaiah Canaan from last years draft that sits at the end of Houston's bench.
            If we are looking at drafting a 3rd Backup PG option to develop, I'd rather spend other resources to get an "end of the bench" Backup PG that IMHO could be attained.

            I'd prefer to draft a Player that either has more upside or is near elite in a particular skillset ( as in, a near elite 3pt shooter, defensive Player or Rebounder/Shotblocker ).
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              If we are looking at drafting a 3rd Backup PG option to develop, I'd rather spend other resources to get an "end of the bench" Backup PG that IMHO could be attained.

              I'd prefer to draft a Player that either has more upside or is near elite in a particular skillset ( as in, a near elite 3pt shooter, defensive Player or Rebounder/Shotblocker ).
              Canaan might end up in 15-16 as the b/u PG in Houston behind Beverly with Linn being in the last year of his contract, but I'd still try and get him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                Canaan might end up in 15-16 as the b/u PG in Houston behind Beverly with Linn being in the last year of his contract, but I'd still try and get him.
                Yeah...if he's too expensive....NP...move on.

                My preference is just to draft a Player that can potentially be a solid rotational Player in the end. I know...we are looking at 2nd round picks here that may not be in the league in 2 years....but if we have very few options to improve the roster for the long-term.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

                  I'd be AMPED if we drafted Russdiculous!!!
                  Senior at the University of Louisville.
                  Greenfield ---> The Ville

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    Yeah...if he's too expensive....NP...move on.

                    My preference is just to draft a Player that can potentially be a solid rotational Player in the end. I know...we are looking at 2nd round picks here that may not be in the league in 2 years....but if we have very few options to improve the roster for the long-term.

                    I believe I read on PD last week that Houston had possible deals for both Linn and Asik, so Canaan would be the b/u next season.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #1: Russ Smith

                      My feelings wouldn't be hurt at all if the Pacers moved up to pick Snyder.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X