Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

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

  • #16
    Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

    To me it's this year's draft. Any lottery pick is not really a gamble. To me there's going to be a cost X for any non-top 2 pick. Sure, it'll be more for 3 than 14 but all around the same cost. Most of the players you can get in that range are going to be worth around that cost X. Some players (I like Brewer and Conley, for example) will probably be worth giving up that X amount. Some players won't be (I really don't like Hawes high in the lottery for example). But all players are going to be sure-fire starters in this league. It's not a huge gamble. Especially if the cost X is a player like Ike going to Chicago who needs a low post guy for the Knicks' pick where Acie Law or Conley might fall.

    Warning: that last example might be wishful thinking, I don't know if Chicago would be that high on Ike or giving up that pick.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

      Almost all championship teams best player is a top-5 pick, and usually that player is drafted by the team he wins the championship with. Proof you say? Well let's look back at the best player on the past 20 years of NBA Champions.....

      MIAMI HEAT (2006)
      Dwyane Wade - #5 pick in 2003, acquired via the draft


      SAN ANTONIO SPURS(1999, 2003, 2005)
      Tim Duncan - #1 pick in 1997, acquired via draft


      DETROIT PISTONS (2004)
      Chauncey Billups - #3 pick in 1997, acquired via free agency


      LOS ANGELES LAKERS (2000-2002)
      Shaquille O'Neal - #1 pick in 1992, acquired via free agency


      CHICAGO BULLS (1991-1993, 1996-1998)
      Michael Jordan - #3 pick in 1984, acquired via draft


      HOUSTON ROCKETS (1994-1995)
      Hakeem Olajuwon - #1 pick in 1984, acquired via draft


      DETROIT PISTONS (1989-1990
      Isiah Thomas - #2 pick in 1981, acquired via draft


      LOS ANGELES LAKERS (1987-1988)
      Magic Johnson - #1 pick in 1979, acquired via draft


      So, if you folks seriously want a championship team, our best bet is to keep the few good young pieces we have now and rebuild through the draft. Land a couple top-5 picks and work from there. Look at Orlando - they have one horrible year and get rewarded with Dwight Howard, a guy with 15 years of dominance left in him. Somebody this year is getting Greg Oden, a guy who looks like the next great big man a la Duncan in '97. The runner-up this year gets Kevin Durant, quite possibly the greatest college freshman ever. If we would've started the rebuilding process earlier, we'd have a serious shot at either of them, and even if not one of them, a Horford, or a Conley, or a Brandan Wright.

      Next year, somebodies getting Mayo, Rose, Gordon, and Beasley assuming they all enter the draft.

      Cavs sucked and got rewarded with LeBron. Their arena was once 2/3rds empty, now they've got a 22 year old who's gonna be a leading contender for MVP for the next 15 years, 25+ nationally televised games a year, and the most marketable player since Jordan. Even if you don't end up with LeBron or Wade, theres still the Melo's, Bosh's, and Hinrichs.

      I'd go ahead and move J.O. for a good young piece and expirings, try to dump a contract with him, and just completely rebuild. Suck for a few years, sure it wont be fun, but you people will somehow manage to live I'm sure. Rack up a few top-5 picks, hopefully draft a new franchise player or two, and watch them grow. It'll take some time (2-5 years, probably 3)and patience, but it'll be well worth it in the long run.

      The sad thing is, I don't think Bird has the patience or intelligence for this, and I think the Simons would rather put together mediocre 40-45 win teams that make a great profit then to wait it out and give the fans something to get truly excited over.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

        Originally posted by Y2J View Post
        Almost all championship teams best player is a top-5 pick, and usually that player is drafted by the team he wins the championship with. Proof you say? Well let's look back at the best player on the past 20 years of NBA Champions.....

        MIAMI HEAT (2006)
        Dwyane Wade - #5 pick in 2003, acquired via the draft


        SAN ANTONIO SPURS(1999, 2003, 2005)
        Tim Duncan - #1 pick in 1997, acquired via draft


        DETROIT PISTONS (2004)
        Chauncey Billups - #3 pick in 1997, acquired via free agency


        LOS ANGELES LAKERS (2000-2002)
        Shaquille O'Neal - #1 pick in 1992, acquired via free agency


        CHICAGO BULLS (1991-1993, 1996-1998)
        Michael Jordan - #3 pick in 1984, acquired via draft


        HOUSTON ROCKETS (1994-1995)
        Hakeem Olajuwon - #1 pick in 1984, acquired via draft


        DETROIT PISTONS (1989-1990
        Isiah Thomas - #2 pick in 1981, acquired via draft


        LOS ANGELES LAKERS (1987-1988)
        Magic Johnson - #1 pick in 1979, acquired via draft

        That's a nice list, but it becomes more interesting if you ask "how did they get those high draft picks?"

        I dont know the answer to all (too lazy to check), but I think the majority is TRADES! When you have a pretty good team, and manage to get a high draft pick via trade (like PHX & CHI this year!) - that's when you become a contender.

        [ I'd also add the next 2 most important players on each team, but I'm lazy... ]

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

          Originally posted by NPFII View Post
          That's a nice list, but it becomes more interesting if you ask "how did they get those high draft picks?"

          I dont know the answer to all (too lazy to check), but I think the majority is TRADES! When you have a pretty good team, and manage to get a high draft pick via trade (like PHX & CHI this year!) - that's when you become a contender.

          [ I'd also add the next 2 most important players on each team, but I'm lazy... ]
          I believe what I've bolded is a very important point.

          For example, Miami won a title in 2006, but would never have done so had they not acquired Shaq. He was the 'X' factor that utimately enabled Miami to acquire other FAs like Payton, Malone and Mourning.

          Sure San Antonion acquired Duncan, but they were able to do so only because Robinson was injured and out for nearly an entire season. You put Robinson and Duncan together, and it does seem reasonable that you will have a pretty decent team. And you will be able to maintain yur stature because the presence of those two players enables you to trade a lot of other assets to obtain the proper role players.

          To this day, I believe that Detroit snatched a title from the Pacers only because they were able to acquire their own 'X' factor (Rasheed) in a trade right before the trade deadline.

          So, my thinking is that teams often get their cornerstones through the draft, but will rarely be able to win a championship without acquiring the finishing pieces through either trades or free agency.

          I think that a point has been made regarding the draft being a greater risk in the acquisition of talent. Trades and free agency (existing NBA players anyway) allows you to see how the player has performed in the league against NBA talent prior to your acquisition. The biggest risk in trades and free agency, as we have most definitely experienced, is character of the acquired players and how that character affects your team chemistry. But you know what you are getting when it comes to talent.

          College players present more risk because its really a crap shoot. In many instances, especially in players taken after the top 6-7 players, you are betting on the come, basing your decision on glimpses of what you've seen in the player, hoping that those glimpses become the norm.

          With international players, it can be similar to going after college players. The game is different, defense is not as good, so evaluating that talent can be muddied somewhat. Or so it seems for Bird and Walsh, anyway.

          This draft is deeper than most, so teams may be very comfortable in knowing what they will get beyond the first 6-7 players. So, maybe as many as 10 or 11 can be drafted before you start getting into risky territory.

          The premise of the thread is that we will soon be old and that we will suffer a huge decline. I'm not concerned with our age. In fact we have a young team. But I am concerned about a huge decline. The reason? A possibility of losing JO without compensation.

          Unfortunately, at this point we cannot obtain anything significant in return, whether in this year's draft or by trade, without Jermaine being offered in exchange.

          We are indeed in a catch-22 situation. And Bird and Walsh find themselves in the same quandry. No matter how they proceed, a lot of folks will be extremely ticked off.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            I'm really getting fed up with the "draft is a gamble" argument. Are you saying trades aren't a gamble? A lot of people would argue our last one was a failed one. Are you saying Free Agency isn't a gamble? Anybody remember the mulligan rule from a couple years ago? I don't remember any teams using that on draft picks.

            Every move we make is subject to chance. But anyone who follows the college game will tell you this year is an absolutely exceptional draft. Combine that with this franchise's track record making astute picks, and this team's dire need for a fresh start, and it's not only a safe "gamble", but one we need to make.
            The draft is more of a gamble then a trade. At least with a trade you have seen the guy play an NBA game before.

            But I don't follow the college game at all.

            My only point is people act like every first round pick or at least every top 15 first round pick is a sure thing - and it clearly isn't.


            Gnome, I guess you and I are on our own.

            Y2J, your list is very impressive and all top 5 picks, or really except for 1 guy all top 3 picks. I'd love to get a top two pick this year - it sounds like those two are sure things and franchise players - but if we trade and get the 12th pick in the draft- I'm not going to be too excited.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

              I think, give or take a few spots, that your odds decrease tremendously as you fall deeper in the draft (as a team making a pick) and by the teens it really gets less likey you'll hit a home run. IOW, Ike is as good or better than any typical 13 thru second round pick.

              This draft may be top loaded but it's still murky after the first few picks.

              As others have said, at least in a trade you've seen the guy(s) playing NBA games. You know how travel and 82 games affect them. You have a much better idea of their drive and desire. With a draft pick you don't know if their goal is to be the best NBA team/individual player ever OR just make the NBA so they can "make it rain".

              But if you can trade up into the top tier of the draft you better make it count. It's not just a wasted draft pick then (if you roll snake eyes) because it costs you something to get there. You can't whiff on it. Of course it does depend on your starting point when you make the deal.... a playoff contender is one thing... a lottery team is another.

              -Bball
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                Y2J gets a great point across with his list. Teams that get to the top start at the bottom.

                That is what I am trying to say here. We are heading downhill. For things to really get better they will get worse first. We can probably have a team built back up to make the playoffs next year and beat out in the first round. But honestly i'd rather get a draft pick in this draft, suck next year, get another good draft pick, and continue to build on from there.

                Look the draft is a risk however Donnie and Larry know how to evaluate talent. They know what to look for in a player. I trust them to make the right call. I wanna roll the dice and take a risk on something great happening.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                  Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                  There are other alternatives for the Pacers other then the draft and that is why I also will totally disagree with Rommie's post. As for the observation of getting to be an old team fast, unless the NBA age limit becomes 15....I'm not going to sweat the age of our players.

                  Yes, I also agree the draft is a gamble, but at least the guess work of evaluating high school talent has been removed taking a lot of blind risk out of it. It seems like a lot of the drafted players that busted were high school players. I know that all situations where you move players is some form of a gamble, but the draft is the form where you are aquiring players "NBA SIGHT UNSEEN". So, the draft harbors more risk then FA's or trades.

                  Why focus on the bust? Because there are too many of them to ignore and one of the biggest bust of the last 10 years is on our team.
                  Totally agree, especially the sight unseen aspect that used to be a problem.

                  Of course another key is "does the team have a GM that can draft". What say on Bender did Bird have at the time? What about on Croshere (seemed like he was a Bird fave at the time)?

                  Danny goes as a neutral, only a fool would have passed him. Everyone considered it a steal to get him there at that moment, not after six months of watching him.

                  Shawne is the one clear good pick that wasn't particularly obvious IMO.

                  Bird's view of Euro-talent has been iffy. Lots of people liked Saras on a limited viewing, but Bird checked him out in detail. Bird then went after Baston instead of Parker when the team needed backcourt help more...and already had too many contracts in place anyway.


                  Is the guy investing for you good or bad, that affects how much you want to play the stock market. The reason stocks work isn't the gamble, it's the certain aspect of inflation. You diversify rather than bet it all on one stock. People that do that lose their money, so it doesn't make a good analogy for the draft.

                  Unless of course you are going to pick 2 guys, sign 2 others and trade for 2 more, just needing 2-3 of them to pan out. That's the NBA diversity program, and it's more expensive than stock diversity which still makes it a bit of a gamble.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                    I'm really getting fed up with the "draft is a gamble" argument. Are you saying trades aren't a gamble? A lot of people would argue our last one was a failed one. Are you saying Free Agency isn't a gamble? Anybody remember the mulligan rule from a couple years ago? I don't remember any teams using that on draft picks.

                    Every move we make is subject to chance. But anyone who follows the college game will tell you this year is an absolutely exceptional draft. Combine that with this franchise's track record making astute picks, and this team's dire need for a fresh start, and it's not only a safe "gamble", but one we need to make.
                    I have been on the forums a while now and have never been more influenced to change my position than right now.

                    As an original "the draft is a gamble" arguer, I salute you.

                    *note: keep in mind that I always used the argument in the context of intentionally "tanking" to get a better pick. I never had a problem with trading to get a pick and have always recognized that it is an essential part of the talent acquisition triad: FA signings, trade, draft.
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Totally agree, especially the sight unseen aspect that used to be a problem.

                      Of course another key is "does the team have a GM that can draft". What say on Bender did Bird have at the time? What about on Croshere (seemed like he was a Bird fave at the time)?
                      I agree as well........when I look at the players that the Bulls and Raptors/Suns ( to a lesser degree ) have scouted and drafted in the last couple of years....and compare them with the players that we have scouted/drafted...I really wish we had people running the show that were a better judge of talent.

                      My confdence in TPTB ability to trade ( much less draft ) players isn't very high.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                        The Pacers don't need a draft pick to improve. As has already been stated, they could go the FA route or make a trade or two and they'll be fine. Or they could shuffle some players around, i.e., move Granger to the 2, move Murphy to the 3 ahead or behind Williams. The thing that works to their advantage is they've got all this versatility and not many players w/clear defined roles.

                        It starts with deciding who stays and who goes. From there you iron out who your starters and reserve players will be, and then start plugging the holes. But the bottom line is the Pacers don't need a draft pick to get better. They just need to make some hardline decisions and stick w/their plan.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                          Originally posted by NPFII View Post
                          I disagree.

                          There is a 4th option. It's called signing INTERNATIONAL free agents. Yes, like Sarunas. Maybe Sarunas was a failed experiment, but look at what Toronto did with Jose Calderon, Anthony Parker, Jorge Garbajosa.
                          Europe's talent pool consists of VERY talented and EXPERIENCED players of all sorts (not just the big lumps like in years past). Guards, forwards, wings, defenders, whatever. The players are usually eager to have a shot at the NBA. Their motivation levels are high, they're NOT knuckleheads, and they come cheap. You can get 2 of Europe's best for the MLE - just choose. Of course you've got to have connections, and negotiate buyout clauses, and legal stuff - but it beats overpaying a guy like Gerald Wallace with a 60mil/5year deal. And it beats trading your best players for a draft pick who might or might not pan out.
                          Ummm

                          To get these impact players you need someone who can actually pick them out; something BIRD has already shown he can't do. Sending Bird to Europe to scout talent is like turning Kevin McHale lose come draft time ---- sure recipe for failure.

                          I've been whinning about (the impact of )giving up the pick since last summer. Now it finally has started to hit home with some of the intelligencia of the board. Bad move, that many of you applauded at the time.

                          Now, take your medicine like big boys. When those studs are being drafted and when we see who we could've gotten in our slot, perhaps some will be a bit more objective when evaluating the work of TPTB in the future.

                          Let's see, once again:

                          Ron Artest and a #1 and eating Edward's contract for

                          essentially Dunleavy and Murphy

                          yeah, we definitely won't be able to get anyone near as good of those 2 in the draft

                          righttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                            Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                            The Pacers don't need a draft pick to improve. As has already been stated, they could go the FA route or make a trade or two and they'll be fine. Or they could shuffle some players around, i.e., move Granger to the 2, move Murphy to the 3 ahead or behind Williams. The thing that works to their advantage is they've got all this versatility and not many players w/clear defined roles.
                            Ok some have said free agents and trades, so my question is who are you going to sign and where is the money going to come from? What moves are going to be made?

                            And you may want to down Larry's ability to draft players because of Saras. Although you can't argue that it's easier to scout in Europe then in college. It's much harder to judge a European player. I am happy Bird took the risk on him.

                            Also, why would anyone bash Bird for not signing Parker? Did you not forget we did not need a shooting guard last summer? We just traded for Marquis Daniels, still had Stephen Jackson, and just drafted Shawne Williams. I would say that a shooting guard wasn't high on the list of needs.

                            And you guys also bash Larry for trading for Mike and Troy. Fact is Stephen had to go, Al needed to go it seems as well. No one wanted Stephen. So Larry had to take on these contracts. He knows they are overpaid. But he also knows that Mike plays well within the team and Troy is capable of playing better than he did. However Larry did do the deal banking on Ike Diogu so I guess it all depends on him.

                            Also, someone wondered what Bird had to say in drafting Jon Bender? Probably some but from the limited time he played he looked good. Didn't UB or someone else just start a thread saying how good JB would have been? The problem wasn't his skills, it was his knees. That isn't something you can predict on any player. If so, then Pat Riley is an idioit when he traded for Alonzo Mouring back in the 90s. Since a few years later Zo had to retire due to a kidney disorder. But that's Riley's fault for not know that was going to happen, just like it is Larry's fault that he didn't know that Bender's knees had problems. Do I have this correct?

                            I have begun to question Bird, however not enough to say I don't trust him making a draft pick.

                            I have faith in Larry to make a trade for a pick and make the right decision. This draft is deep and worth the risk.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                              Less than 1/2 of the top 5 picks make top flight NBA players...do the math!!!!
                              Go Pacers!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Pacers must acquire a draft pick

                                Didn't we once give up an established player to move into the top of the draft? That worked out for us didn't it? Outside of the top 2 in this draft, who are you willing to give up JO for to move into the top 5? I doubt there is anyone else we can trade that will get us there.

                                For every Wade and Jordan you have Darko and Sam B. Heck, it may even be 2 or 3 to 1. That said, if we have a shot at a special player, then I am all for making a move. I just need to be educated on who outside of 1a and 1b is worth that jump in this draft.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X