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

Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

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

  • #46
    Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

    I think this from Conrad Brunner is the best summation of what the Pacers need for next season.



    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/ask_the_pacers.html

    Question for Conrad Brunner | April 30, 2007


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Q. What areas do you think call for the most improvement? I think that a deadly 3-point shooter is something this team is in dire need of. Most teams in the league don't have a dead-eye shooter, but it seems as if a lot of teams' second-best shooters are better than anyone on the Pacers. (From Eric in Union, Ky.)


    A. Though there is an obvious need for at least one more 3-point shooter, the Pacers' most obvious offensive shortcoming last season was the lack of players capable of making something from nothing. When the shot clock is winding down or the play called didn't achieve the desired result, they often were left with a desperate heave because there was no one on the court with the requisite creativity and skill to break down the defense on his own. Marquis Daniels was just such a player and was beginning to come into his own when sidelined by the knee injury. The devastating effect his absence had on the offense clearly illustrates how badly the Pacers need help in this area. Daniels' return to health will help, and Danny Granger could become that kind of player but there still is a major need for a creator -- a player that can create either for himself or a teammate when all else fails.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

      Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
      20 win season? Maybe Bird gets fired after it. Then it would be worth it.
      It should never come to that. He should already be fired.

      But since it hasn't happened yet, then yes, it would be worth it.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

        Blue N Gold - your numbers are WAY off.

        You should look into how many championships the other four players in those drafts have as well as the success of all 5 top-5 players in all the drafts you are ignoring.

        At quick glance, the chances of riding a top 5 pick all the way to a championship is less than 5%. And without Darko, it's even lower.
        “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


        • #49
          Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

          Originally posted by Jay View Post
          It should never come to that. He should already be fired.

          But since it hasn't happened yet, then yes, it would be worth it.
          We like to fire everybody a year later after they are supposed to get fired

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

            Everyone of the championship teams have a top 5 players in them

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

              Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
              We like to fire everybody a year later after they are supposed to get fired
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                It's a proven fact over the past 20 years (and for the majority of the NBA's history) that if you want a championship, you get it by having a top-5 pick as your best player, usually a big man. Sadly, the once-a-decade (or so) big man thats gonna be the next championship force looks to be in this years draft, so we're **** outta luck. But then again, Ewing and Robinson were suppose to be the next championship big men, and then Shaq came along and and was the next big thing. There's a kid named Renardo Sidney, a high school sophomore, 6'9" 250 with a lot of growing left in him (6'11"-7'1" is likely I'd guess), who's already projected as the #1 pick whenever he declares. (probably 2010). Maybe he's the next Shaq and Oden's just the next Ewing. With the way our team looks now, I have a hunch we'll be one of those teams in the Renardo Sidney race in 3 years. Amd if he really is the Next Big Thing, then I'll take 3 years of losing if it means we finally get out dominant championship player. Of course this is a long ways off, so we'll see how things go.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  Rare? Pardon me if I'm wrong, but I thought the following players were picked in the top 5 and won with their original team:

                  Tim Duncan - #1 in 1997 draft with 3 championships
                  Michael Jordan - #3 in 1984 draft with 6 championships
                  Isiah Thomas - #2 in 1981 draft with 2 championships
                  Magic Johnson - #1 in 1979 draft with 5 championships
                  Hakeem Olajuwon - #1 in 1984 draft with 2 championships
                  DWade - #5 in 2003 draft with 1 championship

                  That's 19 of the last 27 championships...or 70%! I don't consider that rare at all. A landslide victory. All of these players were picked by the team they won championships with.
                  That's a wide range from 79 to now. Between Michael and Wade, there was ONE player drafted in the top 5 who won a championship with his original team as their star. That 70% looks impressive, but there's 24 other number one picks who didn't get it done with their original pick. That's not a great percentage for the number one pick, which should be a franchise player.

                  Relying on the draft as a cure-all is a dangerous plan. I'm not saying I wouldn't love a pick, but it won't save the franchise. We need to invest in good vets and a good coach too (not to say I disliked Rick).

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                    [quote=King Tuts Tomb;573572]That's a wide range from 79 to now. Between Michael and Wade, there was ONE player drafted in the top 5 who won a championship with his original team as their star. That 70% looks impressive, but there's 24 other number one picks who didn't get it done with their original pick. That's not a great percentage for the number one pick, which should be a franchise player.

                    Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                    Relying on the draft as a cure-all is a dangerous plan. I'm not saying I wouldn't love a pick, but it won't save the franchise. We need to invest in good vets and a good coach too (not to say I disliked Rick).
                    Actually, the right pick would.

                    Here's 12 of the 25 top-5 picks from 2001-2005...
                    LeBron James
                    Carmelo Anthony
                    Yao Ming
                    Dwyane Wade
                    Chris Bosh
                    Dwight Howard
                    Emeka Okafor
                    Ben Gordon
                    Chris Paul
                    Deron Williams
                    Pau Gasol
                    Jason Richardson

                    Not a bad list, huh?

                    And here's 9 more, while not big time stars, still have the potential to blow up...
                    Shaun Livingston
                    Andrew Bogut
                    Marvin Williams
                    Raymond Felton
                    Devin Harris
                    Darko Milicic
                    Tyson Chandler
                    Eddy Curry
                    Kwame Brown

                    2 aren't bad but are nothing special....
                    Mike Dunleavy Jr.
                    Drew Gooden

                    And only 2 have been huge busts...and one of them can be blamed on a freak accident....
                    Jay Williams
                    Nikoloz Tskitishvili


                    The top 5 of the NBA draft is pretty much a 50/50 thing. 50% chance of aquiring an All-Star or Superstar, a 50% chance of not acquiring an All-Star or Superstar. I'll take those chances over trying to somehow swindle a team out of their superstar any day of the week.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                      Originally posted by Y2J View Post

                      Actually, the right pick would.

                      Here's 12 of the 25 top-5 picks from 2001-2005...
                      LeBron James
                      Carmelo Anthony
                      Yao Ming
                      Dwyane Wade
                      Chris Bosh
                      Dwight Howard
                      Emeka Okafor
                      Ben Gordon
                      Chris Paul
                      Deron Williams
                      Pau Gasol
                      Jason Richardson
                      What are the odds that these players bring a championship to the teams that drafted them (the ultimate goal of drafting a franchise player being a championship). Obviously Dwayne Wade is the ultimate draft success story, but let's look past that (and he didn't do that without a major trade that acquired Shaq).

                      It is widely assumed LeBron James will bolt after his newly signed, but shorter, max deal with Cleveland ends, probably for NY, LA or Chi (there's been word his Nike contract DOUBLES if he plays in a large market).

                      Pau Gasol has been shopped around for a year and a half and led his team to the worst record in the NBA. Emeka Okafor is playing for a notoriously stingy franchise and I don't see him getting the money he expects. Ben Gordon probably will be traded for a low post scorer this summer. Jason Richardson has been on the market for the last couple years.

                      Really the only sure things (that is, players I see staying on their teams long term and possibly leading them to a championship) are Yao, Melo and Howard.

                      All those stars look good now but let's see how many are with the teams that drafted them 5 years from now.

                      Let's look at championship teams built outside of the draft:
                      Detroit 2004-built almost entirely through trades.
                      LA 2000-2002-only major draft player was Kobe, and he wasn't picked until the end of the lottery. Major piece was Shaq, acquired through free agency.

                      Right now the only teams in contention with high draft picks as their stars are Cleveland, San Antonio and Chicago (a team that was in the lottery for years to get to this point. In fact I think they're a team that exemplifies failure in the lottery).

                      So yes, a pick can be the cure-all (Michael, Larry, Magic, Hakeem) but that's a TINY percent of the players. Basically if you don't hit the jackpot, you aren't winning a championship by drafting in the top 5.

                      I would rather the Pacers try to emulate the Pistons success. We're already on our way by firing Rick.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                        Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                        That's a wide range from 79 to now. Between Michael and Wade, there was ONE player drafted in the top 5 who won a championship with his original team as their star. That 70% looks impressive, but there's 24 other number one picks who didn't get it done with their original pick. That's not a great percentage for the number one pick, which should be a franchise player.

                        Relying on the draft as a cure-all is a dangerous plan. I'm not saying I wouldn't love a pick, but it won't save the franchise. We need to invest in good vets and a good coach too (not to say I disliked Rick).
                        I get your point, but I would be fine picking up Lebron James, Chris Bosh and Dwight Howard in successive drafts. None of those guys have won a championship either. I could list more sad players you could get as well.

                        In any event, a wider range gives a better statistical result and drafts from 10 years ago are more relevant than looking at the most recent drafts. It would be like measuring Michael Jordan in the late 80's and assuming he would not get a championship. So it might be a good idea to throw out the last 5 years of drafts from any assumptions.

                        Also, that ONE player has one multiple championships and might win another this year. Again, it really comes down to if you want to win a championship. Certainly I agree there are no guarantees. Certainly a smart GM, a good coach and great chemistry are crucial. They can take you a long way and are really a base requirement. But you cannot deny the record. Generally, you need the raw materials. If we can trade for young talent, I'm good with that...it might be a better plan under the right circumstances...but once again, that ALSO requires dumping your own veteran talent and taking a hit in the W/L. Teams are simply not going to give away a player that everyone already knows is going to be a star.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                          [quote=Y2J;573590
                          Here's 12 of the 25 top-5 picks from 2001-2005...
                          LeBron James - into second round
                          Carmelo Anthony - out in first round
                          Yao Ming - out in first round
                          Dwyane Wade - out in first round
                          Chris Bosh - out in first round
                          Dwight Howard - out in first round
                          Emeka Okafor - DNP
                          Ben Gordon - into second round
                          Chris Paul - DNP
                          Deron Williams- into second round
                          Pau Gasol - DNP
                          Jason Richardson- into second round
                          [/quote]

                          These young guys are starting to make some noise. This is what it's all about. Many of these teams are brand NEW to the playoffs or are moving on up. It's exciting times for some of these teams. Even if they never win a championship ala Charles Barkley, their teams should be exciting for many years to come. Isn't that the minimum a fan really wants?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            These young guys are starting to make some noise. This is what it's all about. Many of these teams are brand NEW to the playoffs or are moving on up. It's exciting times for some of these teams. Even if they never win a championship ala Charles Barkley, their teams should be exciting for many years to come. Isn't that the minimum a fan really wants?
                            But Barkley never made the finals (and had trouble getting out of the first two rounds) with the team that drafted him. Only when he left did he make the finals, and that's my point. A great many of these great young superstars won't be with the teams that drafted them when they find success.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                              Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                              But Barkley never made the finals (and had trouble getting out of the first two rounds) with the team that drafted him. Only when he left did he make the finals, and that's my point. A great many of these great young superstars won't be with the teams that drafted them when they find success.
                              I got your point. Great players change teams and only then win championships. Look at Shaq. But 70+% of the championships are won by a team who drafted the star. The numbers are simply undeniable.

                              But this is not even the key point.

                              The key point is really two related facts:
                              1) The vast majority of the time (Pistons being the rare exception), you need to get a superstar to win it all.
                              2) The vast majority of the time, the superstars are found at the top of the draft board.

                              You might be able to say it is a better plan to trade for a superstar. But you need a substantial amount of veteran talent to get much in return. For example, good luck prying away Dwight Howard, Lebron, Dwade or Carmello. It will not happen. If you can't get that done, good luck even making it to the finals. That's why the % hovers around 70-80% and why I respect your opinion but disagree with you.

                              As for the Pacers, JO is the only valuable veteran piece we have that would bring anything in return...and even his value is questionable due to his body falling apart. We simply do not have the pieces that would lure much young talent to this team via a trade. This will not change as we continue to get draft picks like JT, James Jones, Fred Jones, David Harrison, etc. Granger and Williams are nice players, but will never be superstars and are not going to be the #1 on any championship team.

                              Due to a dearth of talent on this team, the choices are a long period of mediocrity or a nose dive rebuild. The restoration Donnie Walsh wanted to do was a good idea, but requires raw materials. That option is no longer available. Too much talent has exited the building.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Rebuilding question: What do you think about a 20 win season?

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                I got your point. Great players change teams and only then win championships. Look at Shaq. But 70+% of the championships are won by a team who drafted the star. The numbers are simply undeniable.

                                But this is not even the key point.

                                The key point is really two related facts:
                                1) The vast majority of the time (Pistons being the rare exception), you need to get a superstar to win it all.
                                2) The vast majority of the time, the superstars are found at the top of the draft board.

                                You might be able to say it is a better plan to trade for a superstar. But you need a substantial amount of veteran talent to get much in return. For example, good luck prying away Dwight Howard, Lebron, Dwade or Carmello. It will not happen. If you can't get that done, good luck even making it to the finals. That's why the % hovers around 70-80% and why I respect your opinion but disagree with you.

                                As for the Pacers, JO is the only valuable veteran piece we have that would bring anything in return...and even his value is questionable due to his body falling apart. We simply do not have the pieces that would lure much young talent to this team via a trade. This will not change as we continue to get draft picks like JT, James Jones, Fred Jones, David Harrison, etc. Granger and Williams are nice players, but will never be superstars and are not going to be the #1 on any championship team.

                                Due to a dearth of talent on this team, the choices are a long period of mediocrity or a nose dive rebuild. The restoration Donnie Walsh wanted to do was a good idea, but requires raw materials. That option is no longer available. Too much talent has exited the building.
                                Really? That's it? Those are the only two options open to us?

                                I think it's safe to say that there is only one champion a year, correct? Well then since we all agree with this then we all have to fall into another catagory and only then can we decide if the two options you present to us are truely the only options.

                                The two catagory's are as follows.

                                1. Anything less than an NBA title is a failure.

                                2. Satisfaction can be obtained even though you don't win the finals.

                                Depending on how you choose out of the two options above will depend on if your options are correct.

                                If you choose option # 1, then your thought is probably correct.

                                If you choose option # 2, then your thought is way off.

                                I will ask you the following. What new young player did the Indiana Pacers bring on board for the 93/94 season that turned our team around? Who was our draft choice that year?

                                That team made the E.C. finals and they did not follow the formula that you have laid out before us. They spent 4 of the next 6 years being a legitimate title contender, what young studs were brought in?

                                Again I am not saying I don't want a draft pick, I would love to get Oden more than anyone. But if we don't get this your prediction of doom and gloom due to lack of a rookie just doesn't strike me as an accurate description of our predicimate.

                                We've already changed the coach, we'll see how that works. We have to move two more players (at a min.) and then we can see where we truely are.


                                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X