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

LORD HELP OUR PACERS

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

  • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    I don't think the attendance will be as dreadful as some are predicting. The Pacers earned a ton of goodwill over the last few seasons. Sure there will be some people who are upset that Lance is gone, but most people will understand that our hopes were mostly derailed by a freak injury to our top 10 player. We'll probably struggle for attendance on a frigid Tuesday night against the Bucks in the middle of January, but overall I think people will be pleasantly surprised by the attendance.

    The reason attendance was so awful in the late 2000's was because the once-proud Pacers brand had been completely nuked my a large number of issues that have been discussed countless times on here. The Pacers deserved their poor attendance during that time period because they were a terribly run organization. But I think that most people will realize that they are still a team that "deserves" support.

    Many people used to say that there was no way the Colts and Pacers would ever both be enormously popular at the same time. Well the last couple of years have proven that to be BS. I think people underestimate Indy fans sometimes.
    idk. Pretty much the whole season the Pacers were the best team in the nba and some games still looked like there was a lot of empty seats.

    Comment


    • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

      and some sections is bought out by roy hibbert and paul george and george hill.

      Comment


      • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

        I just want to clarify something. Believing that the team should tank this season is by no means wrong. The only issue that I personally have with that is that it is usually associated the idea of "let's trade away everyone who could help us win". That's what I'm personally opposed to.

        Tanking isn't a bad strategy in itself. The problem arises when a team self-sabotages its roster in order to lose more and "tank better". In order to tank you need to have a goal in your mind. How long are you going to tank? When will you start building towards a playoff push? Are you tanking for any specific player? All those questions need to be answered when someone decides to tank.

        In our case we would only tank for 1 year. It could be a case similar to what the Spurs did for Duncan and what the Heat did for Beasley. But then we also have to answer if we're doing it for a specific player. Is there any player in this particular draft that is worth tanking for? Mudiay, Okafor and Karl Towns are great prospects but they are not as highly touted as Duncan was (even though I really like Okafor). They aren't as highly touted as Wiggins and Parker either.

        When you want to tank you also have to ask yourself something very important. Is it worth the risk? There is an inherent risk in tanking. And the risk that I'm talking about has nothing to do with the unpredictable nature of draft picks. The risk is associated with the fact that you actively need to sabotage your team in order to "tank correctly".

        A lot of people said that the Bulls should tank last year. Did they tank? No. They did trade away Luol Deng (who was an important contributor to them) but they did so after having already groomed his replacement (Jimmy Butler). They ended up with the #4 seed and lost in the 1st round (they did seem to miss Deng in that match-up). Where are the Bulls now? They are primed to go to the ECF. Why is that? Because Derrick Rose is returning and the team already proved that they're quite good without him. Oh, and the fact that they didn't tank also convinced Pau Gasol to sign with them and Nikola Mirotic to join them a couple years earlier than he would do if they were tanking.

        What I'm trying to say is that it really doesn't matter if a team tanks or not. What matters the most is whether a team has a plan for what it's doing or not. The Pacers have had a very clear plan in the last couple of years. They planned to win a title and they came close for 2 straight seasons. This plan is obviously on hold due to PG's injury. So, we need a plan for this particular season and we need to combine this plan with our overall plan that could be entitled "win a title before Paul George's max deal expires".

        Tank or not, everything that happens has to happen according to a plan.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          I just want to clarify something. Believing that the team should tank this season is by no means wrong. The only issue that I personally have with that is that it is usually associated the idea of "let's trade away everyone who could help us win". That's what I'm personally opposed to.

          Tanking isn't a bad strategy in itself. The problem arises when a team self-sabotages its roster in order to lose more and "tank better". In order to tank you need to have a goal in your mind. How long are you going to tank? When will you start building towards a playoff push? Are you tanking for any specific player? All those questions need to be answered when someone decides to tank.

          In our case we would only tank for 1 year. It could be a case similar to what the Spurs did for Duncan and what the Heat did for Beasley. But then we also have to answer if we're doing it for a specific player. Is there any player in this particular draft that is worth tanking for? Mudiay, Okafor and Karl Towns are great prospects but they are not as highly touted as Duncan was (even though I really like Okafor). They aren't as highly touted as Wiggins and Parker either.

          When you want to tank you also have to ask yourself something very important. Is it worth the risk? There is an inherent risk in tanking. And the risk that I'm talking about has nothing to do with the unpredictable nature of draft picks. The risk is associated with the fact that you actively need to sabotage your team in order to "tank correctly".

          A lot of people said that the Bulls should tank last year. Did they tank? No. They did trade away Luol Deng (who was an important contributor to them) but they did so after having already groomed his replacement (Jimmy Butler). They ended up with the #4 seed and lost in the 1st round (they did seem to miss Deng in that match-up). Where are the Bulls now? They are primed to go to the ECF. Why is that? Because Derrick Rose is returning and the team already proved that they're quite good without him. Oh, and the fact that they didn't tank also convinced Pau Gasol to sign with them and Nikola Mirotic to join them a couple years earlier than he would do if they were tanking.

          What I'm trying to say is that it really doesn't matter if a team tanks or not. What matters the most is whether a team has a plan for what it's doing or not. The Pacers have had a very clear plan in the last couple of years. They planned to win a title and they came close for 2 straight seasons. This plan is obviously on hold due to PG's injury. So, we need a plan for this particular season and we need to combine this plan with our overall plan that could be entitled "win a title before Paul George's max deal expires".

          Tank or not, everything that happens has to happen according to a plan.
          I agree, what Philly is doing is horrible although there are a lot of people who love what they are doing. There are so many teams who are building year after year after year. I agree trading away assets to get junk in return is not a good way to do it.

          The only question I have for you though is are you sure that Jimmy Butler was replacing Luol Deng? I thought they played together at the wings. I thought Mike Dunleavy was going to be the 6th man. I could be wrong though.


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

          Comment


          • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            I agree, what Philly is doing is horrible although there are a lot of people who love what they are doing. There are so many teams who are building year after year after year. I agree trading away assets to get junk in return is not a good way to do it.

            The only question I have for you though is are you sure that Jimmy Butler was replacing Luol Deng? I thought they played together at the wings. I thought Mike Dunleavy was going to be the 6th man. I could be wrong though.
            Position-wise he didn't replace him. You are correct in thinking that they played together at the wings. Jimmy Butler is more of a SG while Luol Deng is more of a SF. What I meant was that Jimmy Butler replaced Luol Deng's function in the team. Deng functioned as the wing that was the designated perimeter stopper for the Bulls and he was also accounted on to rebound, score and create. Jimmy Butler in this new Bulls squad is going to function in the same capacity. He isn't as good of a scorer or facilitator as Deng was but he is improving in those areas. That's what he is replacing.

            I should have probably clarified it in my original post so thanks for giving me the ability to do that now. Yes, Mike Dunleavy (and possibly Doug McDermott) are going to be the literal replacements at SF for Luol Deng. But Luol Deng's function will be covered by Jimmy Butler. Dunleavy and McDermott are simply going to be there to score.

            EDIT: I also have to clarify that I don't much of an issue with what Philly is doing. I may disagree with it but they are following a plan, at least. It's what the Kings do (or used to do) that is problematic.
            Last edited by Nuntius; 10-22-2014, 07:35 PM.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Personally, I'm hoping that we retain our main core (Hill, West, Hibbert) and only change the surrounding bench pieces. I don't think that it's going to be easy for PG to adjust to new players on the court and new faces in the locker room when he returns. I don't think that it would be fair for him to be injured and when he returns to the court to find a completely different team that is nowhere near as good as the team he was on.

              As far as the rest of your post is concerned, I agree. I don't have any issue with calling PG a potential superstar. It's true that he's not completely up there yet but he's getting close.
              That might work. But I would still suggest you lack a second (or even 1A), dynamic offensive option. I feel strongly that Hill and West (at that point in his career) are more suitable for 3rd/4th offensive option, support roles. HIbbert? Well, personally I think 10 pts per from him would be gravy. He's there from the defensive standpoint. But even then, he needs to show the shot-blocking consistently and improve the boards a tad, IMO.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                That might work. But I would still suggest you lack a second (or even 1A), dynamic offensive option. I feel strongly that Hill and West (at that point in his career) are more suitable for 3rd/4th offensive option, support roles. HIbbert? Well, personally I think 10 pts per from him would be gravy. He's there from the defensive standpoint. But even then, he needs to show the shot-blocking consistently and improve the boards a tad, IMO.
                Honestly, I don't think that this particular core needs to be structured as #1 option, #2 option, #3 option etc.

                This core's highest point was the 2013 ECF against Miami. Did we have such a structure back then? No, we didn't. We always went with the hot hand and that was exactly why we were dangerous. We had a lot of options and we'd swing the ball around until we found a good scoring opportunity. That's exactly what last year's team lacked and why it ultimately failed. It didn't go with the hot hand as much as the 12-13 team did.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                  I hope we tank and hope that Hibbert and West are still here. Trade Hill. We will NOT win a championship with him at the starting pg. He doesn't create for others. Hibbert and PG need a point guard who can set them up for easy scores. I wouldn't care if they moved Hill to shooting guard but the Pacers ain't winning anything with him running point.

                  Comment


                  • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Honestly, I don't think that this particular core needs to be structured as #1 option, #2 option, #3 option etc.

                    This core's highest point was the 2013 ECF against Miami. Did we have such a structure back then? No, we didn't. We always went with the hot hand and that was exactly why we were dangerous. We had a lot of options and we'd swing the ball around until we found a good scoring opportunity. That's exactly what last year's team lacked and why it ultimately failed. It didn't go with the hot hand as much as the 12-13 team did.
                    Interesting point. It may be accurate. Although I chose the 1,2,3 option terminology, I don't mean it so much in terms of a lock-step pecking order. I agree that's what seemed to transpire, particularly over the second half of last year.

                    What I mean is, in the long - term sense (over the course of a season), I think you ultimately need at least two guys you can count on to carry more of the scoring responsibility. The offense does not have to totally center on those two players or constantly privilege them in terms of providing them scoring opportunities in X way, and riding the hot hand at times need not be excluded.

                    I'm just not sure there are many (if any) teams that can be counted on to excel with go with the hot hand as the predominant offensive philosophy over the long term. The Spurs? Maybe. But I'd think you can make a good argument there is a structure to where their bread is buttered offensively.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                      Originally posted by LeRyan07 View Post
                      idk. Pretty much the whole season the Pacers were the best team in the nba and some games still looked like there was a lot of empty seats.
                      I was at every home game last season (and in Milwaukee's best crowd of the season at their shithole of an arena), there were not a lot of empty seats that were unsold. Attendance was VERY strong last season. If I remember right, the Pacers sold something like 96% of the arena on average.
                      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                      Comment


                      • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                        For the product we're going to see on the floor this year, I expect more fans in the seats than there "should" be, being Indiana*, because I imagine most people renewed before the Lance/PG news.

                        PS&E is still trying to sell the top games hard though so it can't be going that well. (See commercial on Fox Sports selling OKC/CLE/CHI/LAC/Etc.) They've called me 3 or 4 times already this offseason trying to sell me tickets and my company group tickets. We've all declined. I actually told the one kid on the phone, "Tank, get the #1 pick and call me next season." He actually laughed and said, "I know." I imagine being a ticket rep for the Pacers is a tough gig. Tickets sell themselves, a person will not sell me.

                        If I could read into the future, I would have purchased several Cavs season tickets, before the LeBron signing, and would probably be retired laying on the beach in Cancun right now.

                        Comment


                        • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                          One person who knows the Indiana fan-base well is Jim Irsay. He knows how bad it was before Peyton came along. Hell, I remember going to games before Peyton was here, as a kid, running around literally playing in the bleachers at the RCA Dome. It was basically a daycare for me while my dad hung with buddies and drank beer. So then Peyton comes around, the team starts winning, regular season games****, and the fans become diehard, filling seats and causing waiting lists for season tickets. Then Peyton goes down with the neck injury and ticket prices plummet, season tickets become available and people in Indiana hop off the bandwagon. So with Peyton's career in jeopardy what does Jim Irsay do? He tanks the season and goes 2-14, when the next best QB comes into the league to save his team and save the fans and his money. (I would love to see a replay of that last game of the season @ JAX by the way. Perfectly executed tank job)

                          Throw this season Pacers. All eyes on 82 losses.

                          Comment


                          • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                            The problem is there is no Andrew Luck in the 2016 NBA draft.

                            Comment


                            • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                              Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                              The problem is there is no Andrew Luck in the 2016 NBA draft.
                              and more to the point, neither is there a Tim Duncan.

                              Comment


                              • Re: LORD HELP OUR PACERS

                                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                                and more to the point, neither is there a Tim Duncan.
                                True but you can always trade that #1/2/3/4/5 to fall back for multiple picks or players. it's a good thing to be holding a top 5 pick. Plus we get a top 10 player in the NBA back next season. Hopefully Larry can bend someone over in a deal before the deadline.

                                David West to OKC for Kendrick Perkins' exp and Steven Adams.

                                That's a good start. Win/win for both teams.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X