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

Lance and George Hill - Comparison

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

  • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
    There's a few tangible stats that point to Lance's all-star caliber potential. He's an elite rebounder and potentially an elite playmaker. With more usage and free throws I don't see why he couldn't be an efficient 20 point scorer in the league as well.
    Potential is just that for Lance... He hasnt realized that yet, and until he does, he falls under the same branch as the Jamal Crawfords and JR Smiths of the NBA... Talented NBA player who could help your club, potentially could harm your ball club with poor decisions, uneven play or distracting antics... 29 NBA GMs are making that statement right now... Potential be damned...
    Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

    Comment


    • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Lance gets drafted in the 2nd round = Its because he had a checkered past

      Lance doesn't get consistent minutes his first two years = the coaches don't like him and are too afraid to give him PT

      Lance gets consistent minutes but is the 5th option = he's not getting the proper opportunity to shine

      Lance doesn't make the AS team = the EC coaches don't like him

      Lance has poor body language = he's just competitive, his teammates should learn to deal with it

      Lance does childish antics during the ECF = his antics arent that bad, he's just competing

      Lance gets a contract offer from Bird = Lance was lowballed and its understandable if he feels disrespected

      There are minimal reports of Lance garnering serious interest = we are waiting for Lebron and Melo to sign before teams decide what to do with Lance

      There is still a lack of reported interest of contract negotiations with Lance = Lance is a future all star and will get a big contract offer. Just a matter of time

      Most 2nd and 3rd tier FAs sign contracts or are close to signing contracts = These guys are all vastly over paid and worse players than Lance

      Most teams that were supposed to have interest in Lance have signed other players = the pacers are going to be lucky to get Lance back

      Lance is most likely going to re-sign at the original contract offer = LancesLance's antics cost him money, but he will learn from his mistakes and continue down the path of greatness.

      Lance is the Pan
      Most of that is fabricated. Nobody has said most of that. If you don't want to hear people defend him, then just stop relentlessly hating on the kid in every single thread that pops up about him, there are at least 4-5 of them on the first page and you are in every single one, saying the exact same things over and over and over. Everyone knows your opinion on the matter by now. And neither sides' POV is gonna change what actually happens. The Pacers want him back. PG was on the news today saying the team needs him back. Only time will tell who is right here, and I am comfortable in my opinion on the matter. I've pretty much had the exact same opinion for 4 years now and I feel like it's been held up by what has happened.

      Regardless, you use things like being a 5th option on a ECF team in his first season in the rotation, being offered only 9 million a year after only 2 years in the rotation, being an all star snub in his second season in the rotation, and not being more heavily courted by teams who are actually looking for SF's as a negative, but truth is, those things are exactly why I am right about this.

      Those are amazing accomplishments for a young player drafted in the second round. Lance has already proven every team in the league wrong for passing on him. Most of those guys drafted around him are already out of the league. He was passed over for the All Star team by a guy who has been a very, very good player for a much longer time, Joe Johnson, who also had a very good year. Reggie Miller didn't make the All Star team until he was 25-26 years old. There is no shame in that. And despite George Hills good attributes and attitude, he was offered more money on the first day of free agency despite what many call a bad attitude, character concerns and all that "risk". You know who else was a 5th option their first season? Paul George. That is not a sign a guy isn't very good. Most players, sans the VERY best, take time to develop and get used to the NBA game. And the good ones figure it out quickly. Lance could of put up numbers his rookie season if he got a chance to play, he had the talent to do that. He just wasn't seasoned enough to help the team win games at that point. He is now, and he has helped us win a LOT of games the last two years.

      I believe there has only been one player in Pacers entire NBA history make the All Star game at 22-23 years old, and that is Paul George. He is the only one. The fact that Lance was a serious candidate is a great accomplishment. And you use that as a negative? Really?

      He has only played for two years, and we have been to the ECF both seasons, and we lost to a truly great team with one of the top 3 players EVER, and is only the 3rd team in history to go to the finals 4 straight years. And you all act like Lance has held this team back? From what? Do you really think we were a championship team? I don't. We played like one for a few months, but a few months is not a champion. And a true championship team would of handled whatever situation caused the collapse much better, if you even call earning a number one seed and losing in the conference finals to one of the great teams of all time a collapse, I don't. I think you are all very out of touch and have some unreasonable expectations. This team has never won a title in its entire NBA history, and only made the conference finals 8 times in 38 NBA seasons. Lance has been a part of two of those (25%). I mean c'mon man get a grip. You really think it's that easy to do? We can just toss out our 2nd most talented player for nothing and not suffer some consequences? It ain't gonna happen.

      You said in a thread not long ago that Lance hasn't really ever accomplished anything. And that is just not true. He is a winner and we've been a better team the minute he stepped into the starting line-up. He has brought us an edge and energy that we desperately needed. He has made us a more dynamic team. He has skills no other Pacers player, and few in the entire league, have. Guys like him don't grow on trees. If he is truly a problem child and is not a good fit here then I am all for getting rid of him. But only if we get something comparable in return, and that means signing him right now, even if we have to overpay a little bit. Its how the NBA works. Mirotic just got over 5 million a year and he is a completely unproven player who has yet to step on an NBA court and prove anything at this level. Everyone except the cream of the crop is overpaid in the NBA. It's how it is. They are overpaid until they help deliver the ultimate prize, a championship for the city they play for. Then everybody is paid just right.

      I think a good chunk of Pacers fans need to realize that there are no guarantees and the best thing you can do is find something that works and build on that. We've got two of the better young players in basketball and the last thing we should do is get rid of one of them and receive nothing in return. It's hard to win a title and we got two young players getting better and better every year and they both already have a wealth of experience, which is the greatest teacher there is. So why don't we keep them together and just let them grow. Hopefully in the future they can succeed where so many Pacers have failed. Honestly the team has never had two players this young, accomplish this much, so quickly. Why we would want to go a different direction is beyond me. This team has it's flaws, but PG and Lance are NOT the flaws on this team,. They are our greatest hope.
      Last edited by Taterhead; 07-14-2014, 01:34 AM.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

        Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
        Potential is just that for Lance... He hasnt realized that yet, and until he does, he falls under the same branch as the Jamal Crawfords and JR Smiths of the NBA... Talented NBA player who could help your club, potentially could harm your ball club with poor decisions, uneven play or distracting antics... 29 NBA GMs are making that statement right now... Potential be damned...
        Lance is a 2 way player and a willing passer. Nothing like those chuckers.

        Comment


        • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

          Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
          Lance is a 2 way player and a willing passer. Nothing like those chuckers.
          Re-read what I said... He is a different kind of player, but he could affect your ball club in the same way as those two... It doesnt matter if he is a two way player or not when a player could potentially be disruptive to the team, regardless of the way he is disruptive...
          Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

          Comment


          • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
            I think a good chunk of Pacers fans need to realize that there are no guarantees and the best thing you can do is find something that works and build on that. We've got two of the better young players in basketball and the last thing we should do is get rid of one of them and receive nothing in return. It's hard to win a title and we got two young players getting better and better every year and they both already have a wealth of experience, which is the greatest teacher there is. So why don't we keep them together and just let them grow. Hopefully in the future they can succeed where so many Pacers have failed. Honestly the team has never had two players this young, accomplish this much, so quickly. Why we would want to go a different direction is beyond me. This team has it's flaws, but PG and Lance are NOT the flaws on this team,. They are our greatest hope.
            Does this apply to ONLY Lance, or would you apply this to Hibbert as well?? Or are there excuses as to why you would not apply this to Roy??
            Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

            Comment


            • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

              Roy isn't young anymore. Roy also threw his teammates under the bus to the media, making him a blood on the hands proven part of the problem.

              Comment


              • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                Roy isn't young anymore. Roy also threw his teammates under the bus to the media, making him a blood on the hands proven part of the problem.
                But don't bigs take longer to develop?? Further, hasnt Roy accomplished alot more than Lance??

                My point is, it is easy for the Lance supporters to throw Roy under the bus and say he is the lone reason for the Pacers collapse and Lance's hands are clean...
                Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                Comment


                • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                  Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                  Does this apply to ONLY Lance, or would you apply this to Hibbert as well?? Or are there excuses as to why you would not apply this to Roy??
                  I never have said we should get rid of Roy. And you are talking to the wrong guy about that because when the ENTIRE board wanted to get rid of Roy before he had a good series against Miami in 2012, I was one of his only defenders, just like I am with Lance. If you don't believe me, feel free to search my post history. In fact, the last thread I started was titled "Lay off the big fella", and I believe that was around 2011-2012, lol.

                  But I would trade him if the deal made the team better. However I would NOT give him away.

                  All that being said......his play last year in the second half hurt this team way more than anything Lance Stephenson has ever done. He was horrible. And anyone who can't see that is blind.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                    Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                    But don't bigs take longer to develop?? Further, hasnt Roy accomplished alot more than Lance??

                    My point is, it is easy for the Lance supporters to throw Roy under the bus and say he is the lone reason for the Pacers collapse and Lance's hands are clean...
                    What does Roy have to do with this?

                    Look, I don't play the blame game. While everyone else was panicking during the first two rounds of the playoffs, I was saying the same thing I just posted a minute ago.

                    Nobody is to blame. These kinds of things happen in sports.

                    Many years of Reggie's career, there were ups and downs. We were an 8 seed a few times, a 4 seed once or twice, a 2-3 seed once or twice, a 1 seed one time. That is how it works. You'll have a year with a great first half, then fade down the stretch. You'll have a year where the first half is a struggle, and you finish on a roll. You'll have years where you just can't find a good mix.

                    This "want and need it now" mentality this country has is ridiculous.

                    And I do want to say about Hibbert, he is not young anymore and I feel he has failed in a leadership role. You are allowed to struggle. But you are not allowed to make a max salary, repeatedly give you games of literally NOTHING in the PLAYOFFS, criticize your team mates and the coaching, make excuses for your poor play and still get the benefit of the doubt. Roy deserves every ounce of criticism he has gotten for the things I listed above. All of which, Lance has yet to give us.

                    That comparison is apples to onions to me.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                      Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                      But don't bigs take longer to develop?? Further, hasnt Roy accomplished alot more than Lance??

                      My point is, it is easy for the Lance supporters to throw Roy under the bus and say he is the lone reason for the Pacers collapse and Lance's hands are clean...
                      Bigs don't take longer to mentally/emotionally mature. I hope he focuses on defense and quits being a diva. Roys game isn't based on athleticism, and he has been healthy, so he should still play a long time. Roy just won't ever be as good as he currently thinks he is on the block.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                        http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...ephenson/page7

                        Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                        My prediction: Lance Stephenson finishes the year #2 in the league in FG% for SGs only behind D. Wade
                        Made that prediction only 2 gms into the season...

                        Of course I'm patting myself on the back, but this thread is kind of relevant to the discussion. Nobody's really changed their mind. If you liked Lance you probably still do, and if you didn't you most likely still don't.

                        lol at mattie too. I miss his diatribes...

                        Originally posted by mattie View Post
                        However, this doesn't make me want to live in a fantasy land where I choose to believe Lance has proven himself to be a great player, and the reason the Pacers are winning. I mean I honestly wonder if Orlando Johnson is better than him RIGHT NOW.
                        That's some good talent evaluation
                        Last edited by CJ Jones; 07-14-2014, 04:30 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                          Most of that is fabricated. Nobody has said most of that. If you don't want to hear people defend him, then just stop relentlessly hating on the kid in every single thread that pops up about him, there are at least 4-5 of them on the first page and you are in every single one, saying the exact same things over and over and over. Everyone knows your opinion on the matter by now. And neither sides' POV is gonna change what actually happens. The Pacers want him back. PG was on the news today saying the team needs him back. Only time will tell who is right here, and I am comfortable in my opinion on the matter. I've pretty much had the exact same opinion for 4 years now and I feel like it's been held up by what has happened.

                          Regardless, you use things like being a 5th option on a ECF team in his first season in the rotation, being offered only 9 million a year after only 2 years in the rotation, being an all star snub in his second season in the rotation, and not being more heavily courted by teams who are actually looking for SF's as a negative, but truth is, those things are exactly why I am right about this.

                          Those are amazing accomplishments for a young player drafted in the second round. Lance has already proven every team in the league wrong for passing on him. Most of those guys drafted around him are already out of the league. He was passed over for the All Star team by a guy who has been a very, very good player for a much longer time, Joe Johnson, who also had a very good year. Reggie Miller didn't make the All Star team until he was 25-26 years old. There is no shame in that. And despite George Hills good attributes and attitude, he was offered more money on the first day of free agency despite what many call a bad attitude, character concerns and all that "risk". You know who else was a 5th option their first season? Paul George. That is not a sign a guy isn't very good. Most players, sans the VERY best, take time to develop and get used to the NBA game. And the good ones figure it out quickly. Lance could of put up numbers his rookie season if he got a chance to play, he had the talent to do that. He just wasn't seasoned enough to help the team win games at that point. He is now, and he has helped us win a LOT of games the last two years.

                          I believe there has only been one player in Pacers entire NBA history make the All Star game at 22-23 years old, and that is Paul George. He is the only one. The fact that Lance was a serious candidate is a great accomplishment. And you use that as a negative? Really?

                          He has only played for two years, and we have been to the ECF both seasons, and we lost to a truly great team with one of the top 3 players EVER, and is only the 3rd team in history to go to the finals 4 straight years. And you all act like Lance has held this team back? From what? Do you really think we were a championship team? I don't. We played like one for a few months, but a few months is not a champion. And a true championship team would of handled whatever situation caused the collapse much better, if you even call earning a number one seed and losing in the conference finals to one of the great teams of all time a collapse, I don't. I think you are all very out of touch and have some unreasonable expectations. This team has never won a title in its entire NBA history, and only made the conference finals 8 times in 38 NBA seasons. Lance has been a part of two of those (25%). I mean c'mon man get a grip. You really think it's that easy to do? We can just toss out our 2nd most talented player for nothing and not suffer some consequences? It ain't gonna happen.

                          You said in a thread not long ago that Lance hasn't really ever accomplished anything. And that is just not true. He is a winner and we've been a better team the minute he stepped into the starting line-up. He has brought us an edge and energy that we desperately needed. He has made us a more dynamic team. He has skills no other Pacers player, and few in the entire league, have. Guys like him don't grow on trees. If he is truly a problem child and is not a good fit here then I am all for getting rid of him. But only if we get something comparable in return, and that means signing him right now, even if we have to overpay a little bit. Its how the NBA works. Mirotic just got over 5 million a year and he is a completely unproven player who has yet to step on an NBA court and prove anything at this level. Everyone except the cream of the crop is overpaid in the NBA. It's how it is. They are overpaid until they help deliver the ultimate prize, a championship for the city they play for. Then everybody is paid just right.

                          I think a good chunk of Pacers fans need to realize that there are no guarantees and the best thing you can do is find something that works and build on that. We've got two of the better young players in basketball and the last thing we should do is get rid of one of them and receive nothing in return. It's hard to win a title and we got two young players getting better and better every year and they both already have a wealth of experience, which is the greatest teacher there is. So why don't we keep them together and just let them grow. Hopefully in the future they can succeed where so many Pacers have failed. Honestly the team has never had two players this young, accomplish this much, so quickly. Why we would want to go a different direction is beyond me. This team has it's flaws, but PG and Lance are NOT the flaws on this team,. They are our greatest hope.
                          Most of what I said about Lance has been said within the few threads that are opened about him right now. I don't need to make **** up, just read.

                          The rest of what you said is mainly subjective. There are facts in there but ideas supported by your opinion. You have your opinion and I have mine.

                          And you're right. I do defend my stance on Lance in most of his threads, bv I get tired of reading the constant overeating he receives.

                          Right now, his FA is doing the talking and so far is closer to my point of a guy that is a pretty good player but no star as opposed to the great player you see.

                          You're biased way of thinking is no different than mine, I'm just using the things I see and read to prove my POV.

                          Edit: Also dont twist my words. I never said Lance not making the AS te was a negative towards him, I said he wasn't an AS and I felt him not being voted in justified that. Nowhere did I say JJ deserved to make it or that Lance was a scrub bc of it. Ive never said Lance wasn't good, and have compared him to accomplished/talented players in this league. Just because I don't think he's great doesnt mean I'm a "hater". I just point out what I see and comment when I feel he's being overrated

                          Edit:
                          Regardless, you use things like being a 5th option on a ECF team in his first season in the rotation, being offered only 9 million a year after only 2 years in the rotation, being an all star snub in his second season in the rotation, and not being more heavily courted by teams who are actually looking for SF's as a negative, but truth is, those things are exactly why I am right about this.

                          Those are amazing accomplishments for a young player drafted in the second round. Lance has already proven every team in the league wrong for passing on him. Most of those guys drafted around him are already out of the league. He was passed over for the All Star team by a guy who has been a very, very good player for a much longer time, Joe Johnson, who also had a very good year. Reggie Miller didn't make the All Star team until he was 25-26 years old. There is no shame in that. And despite George Hills good attributes and attitude, he was offered more money on the first day of free agency despite what many call a bad attitude, character concerns and all that "risk". You know who else was a 5th option their first season? Paul George. That is not a sign a guy isn't very good. Most players, sans the VERY best, take time to develop and get used to the NBA game. And the good ones figure it out quickly. Lance could of put up numbers his rookie season if he got a chance to play, he had the talent to do that. He just wasn't seasoned enough to help the team win games at that point. He is now, and he has helped us win a LOT of games the last two years.

                          He has only played for two years, and we have been to the ECF both seasons, and we lost to a truly great team with one of the top 3 players EVER, and is only the 3rd team in history to go to the finals 4 straight years. And you all act like Lance has held this team back? From what? Do you really think we were a championship team? I don't
                          The comments about him being a 5th option is to show that the TEAM has demonstrated the ability to be successful prior to Lance breaking out. It has nothing to do with Lance nor his progression as a player. Comparing Lance being a 5th option to Paul being a 5th option are two separate set of circumstances. PG had to step up offensively due to the Granger injury. Lance did as well, but in a more limited role. You don't know that Lance could have put up numbers during his rookie season, that's pure speculation. He has helped us win a lot of games the past two years, and if he were re-signed at a fair contract - he could help us win games in the future. Re-signing him to a large contract would hurt our chances to do that because it would take money away from filling out the rest of the roster.

                          Where have I EVER said that he's holding us back? Never have I said Lance is holding us back from being a championship team. Me saying I don't want to overpay for his services is far from holding us back from being a championship team. Again, putting words in my mouth.

                          You said in a thread not long ago that Lance hasn't really ever accomplished anything. And that is just not true. He is a winner and we've been a better team the minute he stepped into the starting line-up. He has brought us an edge and energy that we desperately needed. He has made us a more dynamic team. He has skills no other Pacers player, and few in the entire league, have. Guys like him don't grow on trees
                          The bolded part is subjective. IMO if a guy has a skillset that few players in the league can provide, then that guy would be in high demand. And how has Lance made us more dynamic? Have we avg more PPG since he's been a starter? Have we become a better offensive team? Have we become more efficient? What constitutes as more dynamic? Our offense was at it's best when we had Danny and DC still IMO. That was when we were at our most efficient (hence the top 10 rating in offensive efficiency that year) The addition of Lance to our starting lineup hasn't made us anymore dynamic than we were previously. Stats to prove my point:

                          11/12: 97.7 ppg (13th)
                          Off Rating: 106.7 (7th)
                          Pace: 90.7 (19th)

                          12/13: 94.7 ppg (23rd)
                          Off Rating: 104.3 (20th)
                          Pace: 90.2 (25th)

                          13/14: 96.7 ppg (24th)
                          Off Rating: 104.1 (23rd)
                          Pace: 92.5 (20th)

                          Don't twist my words to make them mean what you want.
                          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 07-14-2014, 09:40 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                            It seems like people are acting as if Lance got a Vet Minimum offer that teams won't touch with a 10 foot pole. He got well above the MLE, which is significant in that it IS better than most FAs can get and it DOES reduce the number of teams who can go after him.

                            I can understand the appeal of the idea that teams are somehow "shying" away from Lance, but in all honesty I think that's only something that comes to mind if you really thought someone was going to offer him big numbers. If you never really thought that, then $8M per year is pretty darn good and not something most teams are going to try to beat.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                              You are right Bill. Lance has proven to be a good starter on a good team. You pay these guys in the 7-9 million dollar range. If Lance was not given an offer by the Pacers, I am sure he would have received interest from several other teams in that price range. But when you come out saying you want to re-sign, and your team offers a fair deal, then Teams aren't going to come and offer the same deal you turned down. The only offer he will see is if someone wants him for 10 plus. So far nobody projects him as a potential multiple time all-star. If they had, he would have already had a press conference with his new team.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lance and George Hill - Comparison

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                Most of what I said about Lance has been said within the few threads that are opened about him right now. I don't need to make **** up, just read.

                                The rest of what you said is mainly subjective. There are facts in there but ideas supported by your opinion. You have your opinion and I have mine.

                                And you're right. I do defend my stance on Lance in most of his threads, bv I get tired of reading the constant overeating he receives.

                                Right now, his FA is doing the talking and so far is closer to my point of a guy that is a pretty good player but no star as opposed to the great player you see.

                                You're biased way of thinking is no different than mine, I'm just using the things I see and read to prove my POV.

                                Edit: Also dont twist my words. I never said Lance not making the AS te was a negative towards him, I said he wasn't an AS and I felt him not being voted in justified that. Nowhere did I say JJ deserved to make it or that Lance was a scrub bc of it. Ive never said Lance wasn't good, and have compared him to accomplished/talented players in this league. Just because I don't think he's great doesnt mean I'm a "hater". I just point out what I see and comment when I feel he's being overrated

                                Edit:

                                The comments about him being a 5th option is to show that the TEAM has demonstrated the ability to be successful prior to Lance breaking out. It has nothing to do with Lance nor his progression as a player. Comparing Lance being a 5th option to Paul being a 5th option are two separate set of circumstances. PG had to step up offensively due to the Granger injury. Lance did as well, but in a more limited role. You don't know that Lance could have put up numbers during his rookie season, that's pure speculation. He has helped us win a lot of games the past two years, and if he were re-signed at a fair contract - he could help us win games in the future. Re-signing him to a large contract would hurt our chances to do that because it would take money away from filling out the rest of the roster.

                                Where have I EVER said that he's holding us back? Never have I said Lance is holding us back from being a championship team. Me saying I don't want to overpay for his services is far from holding us back from being a championship team. Again, putting words in my mouth.



                                The bolded part is subjective. IMO if a guy has a skillset that few players in the league can provide, then that guy would be in high demand. And how has Lance made us more dynamic? Have we avg more PPG since he's been a starter? Have we become a better offensive team? Have we become more efficient? What constitutes as more dynamic? Our offense was at it's best when we had Danny and DC still IMO. That was when we were at our most efficient (hence the top 10 rating in offensive efficiency that year) The addition of Lance to our starting lineup hasn't made us anymore dynamic than we were previously. Stats to prove my point:

                                11/12: 97.7 ppg (13th)
                                Off Rating: 106.7 (7th)
                                Pace: 90.7 (19th)

                                12/13: 94.7 ppg (23rd)
                                Off Rating: 104.3 (20th)
                                Pace: 90.2 (25th)

                                13/14: 96.7 ppg (24th)
                                Off Rating: 104.1 (23rd)
                                Pace: 92.5 (20th)

                                Don't twist my words to make them mean what you want.
                                Did we become a better team with him in the starting line-up? Did we go further in the playoffs than we did before? So how does your argument hold any water? I don't know if you realize this but Lance replaced a pretty good player in the lineup and we still improved as a team. Danny Granger was a solid veteran and a former All Star. If we lose Lance we don't have a player like a pre injury Danny Granger to replace him. We got lucky we had Lance to replace Danny when he did or we would be hurting right now. How many 22-23 year olds could replace a former All Star and leading scorer on a veteran team and actually help improve them? Lance did that.

                                As for your question on how Lance is dynamic......well he is one of the best rebounding guards in the league, our best player in transition, our best player attacking off the bounce, our best finisher in the paint, and our most versatile player. He can and has played 3 positions for us. He has started and lead the bench simultaneously. And he is improving rapidly. He is the definition of dynamic.

                                And as far as your rankings, they are truly meaningless. And last year is a good example. We averaged 1 less PPG than in 2011-12 when we had a healthy Danny Granger. Pace and efficiency mean very little at the end of the day. What matters is points scored and points allowed. The fact is regardless of pace, efficiency and ranking, we averaged 1 less PPG. That is not much of a drop off. And we won more games. His first season, there were some struggles, but you aren't accounting for our lack of a bench that season. It wasn't the starters that struggled, they have carried us to the ECF the last two years. There are many things that play into team statistics and one player is rarely the cause.

                                How many teams lose their leading scorer and become a better team? We became a better team despite losing our leading man and it is due to PG's development and Lance's versatility.

                                Also: Have you said on this board that losing Lance would be "addition by subtraction"?

                                That means he is apparently holding us back.

                                Starters PPG, APG, RPG

                                2011-12 66.8 12.8 29.1
                                2012-13 69.4 16.0 31.2
                                2013-14 70.6 15.5 31.1

                                Our starting line-up has improved in every area since he was inserted into the lineup, except turnovers (8.9/10.1/10.2). If we improve the turnovers we can get even better.
                                Last edited by Taterhead; 07-14-2014, 10:36 AM.
                                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X