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

NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

    http://www.indystar.com/story/sports...alsh/28913573/

    On Wednesday, we gave you the Pacers' best draft picks since joining the NBA in 1976.

    That was easy.
    But what about the other side of the coin? The Pacers, like every NBA team, aren't immune to completely whiffing on draft picks. It's the nature of the business. And it's fun to look back at how those selections were received then and how they panned out.
    As we did with our best list, how high a player was drafted is taken into consideration.
    Here is the list of players Pacers fans wish they could forget:
    10. Steve Stipanovich (1983, No. 2)

    Who they could have drafted: Clyde Drexler (No. 14, Portland), Byron Scott (No. 4, San Diego) and Dale Ellis (No. 9, Dallas)
    Many older fans may take exception with Stipanovich's inclusion on this list, but before you send me your hand-written letters and telegraphs, hear me out.
    Stipanovich was a productive big man, averaging 13.2 points and 7.8 rebounds a game in his five seasons in Indiana. Heck, he was a Wall of Fame honoree at Market Square Arena. But he was also the No. 2 overall pick and was limited to just 403 career games before retiring because of injury. It stinks, but of the top 12 picks from the '83 draft, only Purdue big man Russell Cross (No. 6 to Golden State) played fewer games than Stipanovich.
    At least on the bright side, while in Indy Stipo didn't accidentally shoot himself like he did in college.
    Yup, while at the University of Missouri he inadvertently shot himself in the shoulder but told police a man "wearing a ski-mask, red-checkered flannel shirt and cowboy boots" broke into his house, shouted obscenities about basketball players and opened fire. A day later he recanted his story.
    "It was real scary, very embarrassing. I just panicked," he told Sports Illustrated in 1981. "I wanted a way out without making myself look bad. I thought people would forget about it. Everything just backfired."
    Now to a man we'd much rather trust with a firearm…
    9. Dudley Bradley (1979, No. 13)

    Who they could have drafted: Bill Laimbeer (Cleveland, No. 65) and James Donaldson (Seattle, No. 73)
    Appropriately nicknamed "Dud," Bradley spent two meh seasons with the Pacers before being traded to Phoenix for two second-round picks.
    He played for seven teams in nine NBA seasons, averaging 5.2 points and 1.9 assists a game. But Bradley's story gets interesting when he became a police officer in 2003, an idea he said was planted in his head by former Pacers legend Roger Brown.
    "One day, he said, Roger 'The Rajah' Brown, then the leading scorer in Pacers history, came into the locker room with a gun.
    "'As big as you are, why do you have a gun?' Bradley asked Brown. The Pacers legend said he was now a sheriff and that it was a good career to have after the NBA.
    "'I was interested," Bradley told the Baltimore Sun, "but it was just in the back of my mind.'"
    8. Fred Jones (2002, No. 14)

    Who they could have taken: Tayshaun Prince (Detroit, No. 23), John Salmons (San Antonio, No. 26) and Carlos Boozer (Cleveland, No. 34)
    From former IndyStar columnist C. Jamal Horton:
    "Picking Jones, a guard from Oregon, with the 14th overall pick of the NBA draft Wednesday night was the perfect move for the Pacers. It was a championship move.
    "I'm so serious."
    Seriously, get outta here with that.
    Pacers coach Isiah Thomas said he thought Jones was "the most unique player in the draft," which in hindsight isn't nearly as outlandish as calling it a "championship move." Jones was at least a slam dunk champ (2004) during his Pacers tenure. He scored just 420 points in his first two seasons, but nearly doubled that amount (813) while most of the Pacers roster was in suits following the Malice in the Palace in 2005.






    Donnie Walsh said on draft night, "I know we're going to have a long, long relationship." And they might. Fred still lives in town. But he was a Pacer for just four seasons, starting a mere 19 times in 245 games.
    7. Tyler Hansbrough (2009, No. 13)

    Who they could have drafted: Jrue Holiday (Philadelphia, No. 17), Ty Lawson (Minnesota, No. 18), Jeff Teague (Atlanta, No. 19), Taj Gibson (Chicago, No. 26), DeMarre Carroll (Memphis, No. 27)
    To think the Pacers' decade-long point guard woes could have been solved had the Nets drafted Hansbrough rather than Louisville's Terrence Williams two picks ahead of the Pacers.
    Larry Bird had a contingency plan if the UNC star wasn't around when Indiana picked: either Jrue Holiday or Ty Lawson. Indy native Jeff Teague wouldn't have been a bad pick either.
    "(Holiday is a) great kid, he's beyond his years, but I'm going with guys that can come in and play and I felt very high of Tyler for a long time," Bird said on draft night. "I was worried New Jersey was going to take him at (No.) 11, and if they did, I probably would have went with Jrue or Ty, but (Tyler is) who we wanted and we were lucky to get him."
    Drafting Holiday would have made life easier for his wife, U.S. women's soccer team star and former Ben Davis standout Lauren (Cheney) Holiday.
    Never short on hustle, Psycho T spent four seasons with the Pacers and showed flashes when inserted into the starting lineup, including a 22-point performance in the 2011 playoffs versus the Bulls. But those moments were few and far between.
    In four seasons in Indiana, Hansbrough averaged 8.9 points and 4.7 rebounds before signing with Toronto as a free agent after the 2013 season.
    The Pacers' search for a "pure" point guard remains.
    6. David Harrison (2004, No. 29)

    Who they could have drafted in 2004: Anderson Varejao (Orlando, No. 30), Chris Duhon (Chicago, No. 38), Trevor Ariza (New York, No. 43)
    Bird admitted trying to trade up to No. 3 for UConn guard Ben Gordon, but couldn't get a deal done. Instead, the Pacers stood pat and took the big man out of Colorado.
    "I'm going to show them I'm one of the hardest workers they've ever drafted," Harrison said after the Pacers selected him.
    Harrison started 33 games over the course of his first two seasons with modest returns, and was an afterthought in the 2006-07 season under new head coach Jim O'Brien. Harrison was out the league by 2008 and lays much of the blame for his flame out on O'Brien.
    "I literally had to smoke pot every day so I would not hurt him," Harrison told Yahoo Sports' Marc J. Spears. "I would avoid him. I'd come in early and stay late. It wasn't like he hit me; he verbally abused me. But what coach doesn't?"
    Last year, he posted a series of blog entries regarding the Malice in the Palace and its aftermath, in which he criticized the franchise's retooling of the roster, among other claims.
    "Unknowingly to me at the time, my life and career would continue the downward spiral leading to my exile to China," he wrote.
    Harrison played in China for three seasons and struggled financially without an NBA paycheck. For two weeks in 2013, he worked at an Indianapolis McDonald's.
    "I was embarrassed because of where I could be in life," Harrison told Yahoo Sports. "Everybody has to work and make a living somehow. I have two children. They don't care where I work. They just need to eat.
    "People were showing up trying to take my car. My house was in foreclosure. I didn't have any income. I just had everything going out. I have child support to one son. I have a really big family and I have to take care of them, even through I'm not playing in the NBA. I needed money."
    5. Rick Robey (1978, No. 3)

    Who they could have drafted: Larry Bird (Boston, No. 6)
    This is more about the pick that wasn't rather than the one that was.
    After winning a coin flip, the Pacers initially held the No. 1 overall selection in the 1978 draft, but traded the pick to Portland when they couldn't convince Larry Bird to skip his senior year at Indiana State. Bird was eligible for the '78 draft despite his intention to return to college because his original class at IU, where he attended briefly, had graduated.
    Mychal Thompson went No. 1 overall, followed by Phil Ford to Kansas City. Then the Pacers — rather than risk drafting Bird only to lose his draft rights a year later — took Robey, a 6-11 Kentucky star fresh off a 20-point, 11-rebound performance in the NCAA title game. Bird was drafted three picks later at No. 6 by Boston.
    Robey was traded 43 games into his Pacers career, while Bird was preparing for a road trip versus Wichita State. Bird signed with the Celtics after the Sycamores' 1979 run to the title game, and the rest, well, you know. But hey, at least he's ours now!
    … Yeah, not the same.
    4. Jonathan Bender (1999, No. 5)

    Who they could have drafted: Richard Hamilton (Washington, No. 7) and Shawn Marion (Phoenix, No. 9)
    I take no pleasure placing Bender this high on the list, but the facts are the facts — Bender didn't provide anything close to what you'd expect from a No. 5 overall pick. Especially in a draft that produced six All-Stars selected after Bender.
    "I've never drafted a player with more potential. I can tell you that without even thinking about it," Donnie Walsh said of Bender 15 years after selecting him.
    Bender was an athletic freak. A 6-11 bouncy small forward with silky moves and a competent jump shot. "Think Kevin Durant before there was a Kevin Durant," Walsh told the IndyStar's Zak Keefer last year.
    However that promise never materialized due to chronic knee pain, which forced Bender to retire prematurely in 2006. He played just 30 combined games in his final three seasons with the Pacers and stepped away from basketball before re-emerging with Walsh and the Knicks for a 25-game stint in the 2009-10 season.
    3. Shawne Williams (2006, No. 17)

    Who they could have drafted: Rajon Rondo (Phoenix, No. 21), Kyle Lowry (Memphis, No. 24) and Paul Millsap (Utah, No. 47)
    The immediate reviews of the pick weren't glowing. During the draft's ESPN broadcast, Jay Bilas didn't exactly put Pacers fans' mind at ease.
    "I wonder, though, if he's a winner," Bilas said. "He's physically weak right now. He has to improve that, and he has to be more focused as a defender, as a rebounder. Right now he's only focused on scoring. Frankly, he's such a young player, he plays only when he feels like it. He's got the tools, though."
    His college coach, John Calipari, was quick to Williams' defense: "They can say what they want, he's going to be the sleeper of the draft."
    Asked about the doubters at his introductory press conference, Williams' response: "You wait."
    Unfortunately for Williams, the wait on a verdict wasn't long.
    He backed up Danny Granger for two seasons, averaging 5.6 points and 2.3 rebounds in 111 games in Indiana, but in 2008 was traded to Dallas for Eddie Jones, who was subsequently granted his release.
    To Williams' credit, he's still in the league. He's played for seven different teams and split last season between the Heat and Pistons. Though we'd be remiss not to mention his off-court issues, which included almost as many drug arrests as career double-doubles (three to four).
    2. George McCloud (1989, No. 7)

    Who they could have drafted: Shawn Kemp (Seattle, No. 17) and Tim Hardaway (Golden State, No. 14)
    Things got off to a rocky start for McCloud in Indiana. Injuries limited him to just 413 total minutes as a rookie, and when he did play, he was lost trying to be a 6-6 point guard.
    "George came into a tough situation, as a point guard, and he wasn't ready for it," said Chuck Person, who befriended McCloud. "He didn't play much and lost his confidence."
    Years 2 and 3 weren't much better and Pacers fans vented their frustrations -- often.
    "He got booed every time I put him in," recalled former Indiana coach Bob Hill.
    "Deep down I knew I could play but I was definitely thinking maybe Indiana wasn't the place for me," McCloud said when asked in 1993 if he thought his days here were numbered.
    They were.
    After averaging 5.5 points and 2.0 rebounds a game in four seasons, McCloud wasn't re-signed by the Pacers and was out of the league, forced to head to Italy for a year. He resurfaced in the NBA with Dallas for the 1994-95 season and was a revelation a year later for the Mavericks, averaging 18.9 points a game. But as far as Pacers fans are convinced, he was and will always be a bust.
    1. Scott Haskin (1993, No. 14)

    Who they could have had: Sam Cassell (Houston, No. 24) and Nick Van Exel (L.A. Lakers, No. 37)
    Pacers fans knew right away and weren't shy voicing their displeasure, chanting "Walsh must go" after the pick was announced -- and that was at the team's official draft party!
    Former IndyStar columnist Bill Benner on the scene in '93:
    "Departing from tradition and maintaining a low profile in an undisclosed MSA bunker, the Pacers' president instead designated Mark Boyle, the team's first-class radio voice, to be the public bearer of decidedly unpopular tidings.
    "It was akin to being appointed Saddam Hussein's spokesman to a group from the American Legion."
    Ouch.
    Ironically, the Oregon State big man was strongly recommended to the Pacers by our No. 10 entry on this list, Steve Stipanovich, who was living in Oregon at the time.
    Double whammy.
    Haskin was a two-time All-Pac 10 performer and the Pacers were looking for another big man to provide depth behind Rik Smits and the Davis brothers.
    "I just say to the fans, `Wait and see me play before you make a judgment on my skill or about me,' " Haskin said at his introductory press conference.
    "With development, I think I can become like a Kevin McHale."
    • McHale: 13 NBA seasons, 7 All-Star appearances, 17,335 points, 7,122 rebounds
    • Haskin: 1 NBA season, 0 All-Star appearances, 55 points, 55 rebounds
    Yeah, not quite.
    Dis-honorable mention: Malik Sealy (1992, No. 14), Primoz Brezec (2000, No. 27) and Erick Dampier (1996, No. 10)
    370 CONNECT 88 TWEETLINKEDIN 11 COMMENTEMAILMORE
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

    I loved Fred Jones and dont consider him a bust. Shawne Williams at least has talent, but the Scott Haskins and Tyler Hansbrough picks still make my blood boil. How could they have been SOOOO wrong.

    Also Malik Sealy was NOT a bust WTF when did the writer start watching the Pacers? For your own sake I hope Kevin Garnett never see's that.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

      To not have Bender at number 1 is just mind blowing. First, it cost us Antonio Davis and his 6 fouls against Shaq in the 2000 Finals. Second, we somehow managed to draft a bust in a pretty stacked draft. The next five players taken after Bender were Wally, Rip, Andre Miller, Marion, and Jason Terry. Trading away AD wouldn't have been so bad if we had come up with one of those five guys, but we somehow drafted a bust in loaded draft. It's rare to do so much catastrophic damage with one draft pick. That's also the year where Walsh traded 26 and the would-be 14th pick in 2001 so that we could draft Foster at 21. The 1999 NBA draft was just a complete hideous train wreck for the Pacers.

      Haskin at number 1 is silly. When analyzing whether a player is a bust or not, you gotta look at the guys drafted behind him who you passed. This is why the Bender pick was so abysmal. Haskin was picked at 14. The only worthwhile player taken after him in the first round was Sam Cassell at 24. Between them, you had Doug Edwards, Rex Walters, Greg Graham, Luther Wright, Acie Earl, Scott Burrell, James Robinson, Chris Mills, and Earvin Johnson. That's a list of complete and utter crap. In no way is Haskin the worst pick in Pacers history when virtually everyone picked after him was crap. It was just a weak draft at that point.

      This is why I've never been too hard on the Shawne Williams pick. Passing on Rondo sucked, but virtually everyone else picked after Williams was a bum.

      McCloud was definitely a bust. Passed on Mookie Blaylock, Tim Hardaway, Dana Barros, and Shawn Kemp.
      Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-24-2015, 08:16 AM.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

        Sealy didn't do much as a Pacer, so I can kind of see why the writer considers him a bust. Fred Jones was a contributor in our rotation for 3 out of his 4 seasons, so I wouldn't consider him a bust.
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

          David Harrison was no a bad pick at 29...come on, it's the 29th pick. They rarely amount to something that far in the draft.

          Technically we didn't draft Bender, it was Toronto. And it was his injuries that killed him....he was a great talent if he didn't get injured
          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


          Comment

          • #6
            Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

            I had a draft party the night of the Tyler Hansbrough selection with about 8 buddies over.We all went absolutely insane (with excitement) when Stern took the podium and said: "With the 13th pick in the 2009 NBA Draft, the Indiana Pacers select Ty.....(we all thought it was Ty Lawson)......ler Hansbrough." The room went silent and then all you heard was "WHAT?!?!? WTF???!!!......." Such a bad pick. I dont get it.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

              I really hate the description of guys whose careers were cut short by injuries as if everyone should have known ahead of time they were going to get hurt. They might have ended up bad picks, but it's not like they were preventable.
              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

              • #8
                Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

                I realize Stipo was before many of you were old enough, or born to follow the pacers. But Stipo was IMO highly underrated. he did all the dirty work, all the intangibles. He was an excellent player for us. Only problem is his career was cut short due to injuries. He was a player you could win with.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: NBA Draft: Ranking Pacers' 10 worst picks in history

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I realize Stipo was before many of you were old enough, or born to follow the pacers. But Stipo was IMO highly underrated. he did all the dirty work, all the intangibles. He was an excellent player for us. Only problem is his career was cut short due to injuries. He was a player you could win with.
                  I didn't want to say anything because this was at the beginning of my "Atlanta Basketball Blackout" so I have no detailed information, but this is how I always felt about Stipo.
                  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

                  Previous template Next
                  Working...
                  X