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

All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Who do you have in mind that we could have targeted and in the end what does this have to do with Roy? Roy was moved to free up money specifically for Stuckey.

    Beyond this, Roy himself has said he knew he was done as a Pacer during last season basically. The relationship was over there was no saving it and for as much as it was about Roy, I think a big part of it was that Ian was on the roster as a cost effective option. Is Roy truly 11 million dollars better than Ian Mahinmi? I think we all know that answer, even you.

    David West left to go play for San Antonio regardless of him blaming it on Larry's postseason presser like the politician Dave is.

    And on top of ALL OF THAT, the Pacers still play 3-4 rotational bigs every game which is on par or better than just about any team in the league. The Pacers are mixing small ball and size just like a lot of us said they would. They haven't been nearly as "small" as many of you predicted. Mainly because Larry bird and Frank Vogel are not idiot kings.

    The opportunity to solidify the starting 5 exists in a major way next offseason and you need to fill and get talent when you can while also clearing out bad contracts (Which Roy was/is at this point). I think you have to consider all of Larry's moves this offseason in a two year window. Rome wasn't built in a day.
    If Turner was healthy, we would have a legit rim protector/center for 48 minutes, which is what a lot of us were arguing when this roster was shaping up. And like TJ said, we're still flexible to take the next step as contender.

    Comment


    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      I just will have to disagree that we can really interpret Larry based solely off of his media comments. Yes, that is all we have to go on, but to think his bluntness isn't at least a contributing factor to confusion/word play doesn't jive for me personally and that has nothing to do with his resume, just who he is.
      Larry was given multiple chances to clarify his position and walk PG off the ledge. (ledge probably isn't the best word but whatever) He declined to do so, and instead did his best at getting into his star player with a public spat about who makes the decisions.

      Dumbassery.

      And PG won that public spat, which is all the funnier. And his defense on wing players is showing why the thought of moving PG to defend the 4 was asinine to begin with.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        Larry was given multiple chances to clarify his position and walk PG off the ledge. (ledge probably isn't the best word but whatever) He declined to do so, and instead did his best at getting into his star player with a public spat about who makes the decisions.

        Dumbassery.

        And PG won that public spat, which is all the funnier.
        LOL that lasted for all of 1 preseason game and then ended with the star player saying publicly that he was comfortable with the plan after having another sit down with Larry. Personally I'm not surprised when two hard headed individuals have words in public, that is the nature of the beast. I thought all of it was meaningless and it has ended up being exactly that,
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-23-2015, 04:48 PM.


        Comment


        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          Ed Davis, Amir Johnson, Brendan Wright.

          Are those guys fixes for the position? No, not even close. But they could have definitely filled a need.

          Do they? Are any of those guys really noticeably better than what Jordan Hill or Lavoy give you? Sure they may be better at certain things, but JHill and Lavoy are better at others. It's a trade off when you're shopping in that price range.

          Would any of the people so upset with the direction of this offseaosn really be that much more excited if we had gotten Ed Davis (another Laker big man that they didn't want to re-sign) over Jordan Hill? Would that really have made people that much happier? Would have made the team noticeably better?


          Off to watch IU hopefully win this game. I'll check back in later. Toodles.


          Comment


          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            LOL that lasted for all of 1 preseason game and then ended with the star player saying publicly that he was comfortable with the plan after having another sit down with Larry. Personally I'm not surprised when two harded individuals have words in public, that is the nature of the beast. I thought all of it was meaningless and it has ended up being exactly that,
            It's meaningless now that Larry caved. When your star player says "no thanks" the whole off-season and then comes out point blank again after one preseason game, after the GM spent the whole summer trying to tell everyone how great of a move PG to the 4 was going to be, it's a black eye for the GM. I don't care if it's Larry Bird or David Kahn.

            The plan was stupid, and it got implemented for exactly one preseason game before it was blown to bits.


            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            Do they? Are any of those guys really noticeably better than what Jordan Hill or Lavoy give you? Sure they may be better at certain things, but JHill and Lavoy are better at others. It's a trade off when you're shopping in that price range.

            Would any of the people so upset with the direction of this offseaosn really be that much more excited if we had gotten Ed Davis (another Laker big man that they didn't want to re-sign) over Jordan Hill? Would that really have made people that much happier? Would have made the team noticeably better?
            I wasn't saying sign them over JHill, but rather WITH JHill.

            You, of all posters, giving confidence posts to Lavoy Allen? I don't have faith in Lavoy for an entire season to produce at the level needed to produce. I don't have faith in JHill to keep this level of play up. Will he, or they, be horribly bad? No, but they're clearly weak links. Adding another big, and swapping one of those players in for one of the Pacers 10 (not really 10) wings would give me more confidence, yes. Instead of having quality with one post player, you can find quality among a group.

            I don't think it's coincidence that the Pacers play their best with a traditional two big lineup. It's just too bad that they don't have enough big men to play two bigs for the entirety of the game. Or at least the vast majority of it. If they had another big, they would have that option. But now, they don't so they're stuck with a 2/3 playing the 4 for at least 20mins every night simply because they don't have the big horses.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

              Hopefully another Pacers big doesn't go down with an injury, of the lack of quality bigs will really be a problem. Or....if just Ian goes down. Having to watch either JHill/Lavoy play the 5 for multiple games and be really the only options to do so, gives me nightmares.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Hopefully another Pacers big doesn't go down with an injury, of the lack of quality bigs will really be a problem. Or....if just Ian goes down. Having to watch either JHill/Lavoy play the 5 for multiple games and be really the only options to do so, gives me nightmares.
                That goes for any team in the league though. Can't really build a roster around "what if your starting and back up center get injured at the same time."

                We don't lack quality bigs. Do we lack quality point guards because if Monta and Ghill are both injured we're in trouble?
                Last edited by freddielewis14; 11-23-2015, 05:08 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                  Also, JHill was slated to play center before the season started. Basically Turner looked like he was ready to play and Vogel wanted to play Ian/Turner 48 minutes a game with JHill manning backup 4 and Lavoy playing spot minutes at the 4 and 5.

                  When healthy, the rotation is perfect for now. Turner and JHill were big surprises.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                    Sinking some extra free agency money into a PF last summer was more difficult than it sounds. The 3 names mentioned for example all agreed to a contract before Hibbert was traded. Johnson and Wright agreed to a contract on July 1st, and Davis was on the 2nd. Hibbert wasn't traded until the 4th after the Lakers struck out on their big free agents. The Pacers would have had to prioritize a big man over signing Ellis.

                    Would they be better right now with another rotational big and no Ellis? Possibly (I don't think so, but I could see the argument), but players of Ellis's skill level don't come around as often as players like Davis do. I'd rather have the extra talent locked in and chase after more bigs next summer.

                    The lineup data is interesting. After being the worst on the team early in the season, LaVoy Allen's plus/minus is ridiculous. Every single positive lineup the Pacers have is either a small lineup or has Allen in it. Hill and Mahinmi both have some positive small ball lineups they have played in, but their pairing together has really struggled. The Pacers small ball starting lineup has also struggled.

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      I can't remember, but who was out there after the dust settled from Hib/West/Draft?
                      I don't think that Roy's and West's departures were news to Bird. I believe that he made all his off-season planning with the assumption that neither of them would be part of the Pacers. Therefore, I don't think that the timing of their departure affected his ability to find replacement bigs. I'm not even talking about big names. The biggest name that I could ask for (knowing our financial situation) would be someone like Robin Lopez. The rest would all be mid-tier names like Ed Davis, Kosta Koufos or Bismack Biyombo. Just an extra big to fill the gap.

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      We wanted to start a mobile player at the 4 that could hit the 3, so basically a taller version of CJ.
                      We are having most of our success by playing our 2-big lineup that consists of either Jordan Hill or Lavoy Allen at the 4.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Ed Davis, Amir Johnson, Brendan Wright.

                        Are those guys fixes for the position? No, not even close. But they could have definitely filled a need.
                        Thanks. I forgot that Brandan Wright could be available. He would be on my list as well.
                        Last edited by Nuntius; 11-23-2015, 09:00 PM. Reason: turns out that it's Brandan Wright and not Brendan Wright
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          - We drafted a stud 19 year old big man who clearly belongs in this league.
                          Absolutely. And Turner's presence makes this transition far easier than it would be without him.

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          - We already had a good defending big man on the roster in Mahinmi
                          And I am extremely thankful for that. There is a reason why I always considered Ian one of the best backup bigs in the NBA.

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          who we thankfully don't have to placate with a bunch of touches on the offensive end.
                          I have a hard time seeing how can anyone think that you have to placate one your players with a bunch of touches. Basketball is a simple game. If a player is in a good scoring position, he should get the ball and attempt to score. That's it. Ian and Roy have different scoring positions that they're good at but we never had to placate any of them.

                          By the way, it's also kinda important to note that Ian is averaging more FGA than Roy this season.

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          - We added a PF in Jordan Hill who is better than David West right now. No he is not better than 12-13 West or 13-14 West, but he is better than David West at this moment in time.
                          My question is this. What is stopping us from adding another big apart from Jordan Hill? I don't have a problem with the way any of our bigs are currently playing. I just wish that we had more of them.

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          - We are 8-2 in the last ten games and the roster is coming along nicely. This is not yet the finished product.
                          I said it before and I'll say it again. I don't care about the record. I'm not complaining about the team's performance. I'm not complaining about the product, as you call it. I don't have an issue with any of that. My issue is with the process. That's exactly why my criticism is not directed to any player on the team or to any of our coaches. My criticism is directed entirely to Bird.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Who do you have in mind that we could have targeted
                            Robin Lopez, Ed Davis, Kosta Koufos, Brandan Wright, Bismack Biyombo, Amir Johnson and so on.

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            and in the end what does this have to do with Roy?
                            Nothing. I never said that my disagreement with the moves have anything to do with Roy.

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Beyond this, Roy himself has said he knew he was done as a Pacer during last season basically. The relationship was over there was no saving it and for as much as it was about Roy, I think a big part of it was that Ian was on the roster as a cost effective option.
                            Sure, I can accept that. It doesn't change the fact that we could have acquired more bigs if Bird didn't want the team to gravitate towards small ball.

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            And on top of ALL OF THAT, the Pacers still play 3-4 rotational bigs every game which is on par or better than just about any team in the league. The Pacers are mixing small ball and size just like a lot of us said they would. They haven't been nearly as "small" as many of you predicted. Mainly because Larry bird and Frank Vogel are not idiot kings.
                            We haven't been as small as Bird said that we would be either. And the reason for this Frank Vogel. Yes, Frank is not an idiot. In fact, Frank Vogel is a freaking genius. He saw that playing PG at the 4 wasn't going to work and altered the plan. He is the main reason for our current team's success and I'm grateful that he's our coach.

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            The opportunity to solidify the starting 5 exists in a major way next offseason and you need to fill and get talent when you can while also clearing out bad contracts (Which Roy was/is at this point). I think you have to consider all of Larry's moves this offseason in a two year window. Rome wasn't built in a day.
                            We'll see. I don't know if you remember our discussions about it during the off-season but the main reason I was freaking out (as you and some others called it) was that I didn't believe that Bird was going to go after any more bigs. That's why I was relieved when we signed Jordan Hill and Rakeem Christmas. So, we'll see what happens in the off-season.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                              We don't lack quality bigs. Do we lack quality point guards because if Monta and Ghill are both injured we're in trouble?
                              No, because we still have Rodney Stuckey and Joe Young to handle the ball and initiate our offense. Plus, even Paul has shown a tremendous improvement in his passing game lately. So, I'd say that we're pretty much set at PG.

                              Who is our rim protector if both Ian and Myles are injured? Rakeem Christmas is the only other Pacer that could potentially do it.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                                Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
                                Sinking some extra free agency money into a PF last summer was more difficult than it sounds. The 3 names mentioned for example all agreed to a contract before Hibbert was traded. Johnson and Wright agreed to a contract on July 1st, and Davis was on the 2nd. Hibbert wasn't traded until the 4th after the Lakers struck out on their big free agents. The Pacers would have had to prioritize a big man over signing Ellis.
                                I agree that the timing was tricky but the trade was already in the works before the 4th. If Larry was interested in any of those players he could reach out to them, pitch them his offer and tell them that the move is going to be finalized after the trade. Stuckey's contract was finalized after the announcement that we re-signed him as well.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X