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 Nuntius View Post
    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.
    True, but the trade wasn't a sure thing to go through. It was contingent on the Lakers striking out in free agency. I doubt any of those big men turn down lucrative multi-year offers to wait around for several days hoping that the Pacers are able to open up cap space and offer them a deal.

    Comment


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

      I'm not going to lie. I agree with Nuntius that we need a better front court...definitely bigger too if CJ is the PF.

      But I would also say that neither DWest or Roy Hibbert are the answers for either position. DWest is done. Just read Conrad Brunner's article and watch a few replays of the Atlanta series. I'm sorry, but 2012 Roy Hibbert does not exist. It would have been nice, I agree.

      Finally, the Pacers did acquire Jordan Hill and drafted Myles Turner. They have made progress. Maybe Pacer fans just need a little patience.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
        True, but the trade wasn't a sure thing to go through. It was contingent on the Lakers striking out in free agency. I doubt any of those big men turn down lucrative multi-year offers to wait around for several days hoping that the Pacers are able to open up cap space and offer them a deal.
        True. But even if the Lakers deal failed, Larry was determined to get rid of Roy. He'd find another deal.
        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 Nuntius View Post

          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.
          You don't care about the record, you're not complaining about the team's performance, you're not complaining about the product............yet you're still very mad at Bird.

          Seems to me like there's just no way Bird can objectively win in your book regardless of how the team performs. It looks to me like you'll stay mad at him for a long time because he traded away a player who you liked a lot and you didn't like the way it went down. I don't see how you can give Bird much of a fair shake if you don't care about the record, performance, or the product.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            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.




            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.
            OK I'm on board with adding say Ed Davis with Jordan Hill, but seems impossible with Stuckey and I'm not on board with dumping Stuckey just to sign Ed Davis or sacrificing cap space next season just to sign Ed Davis.


            Comment


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

              Nunt, I love ya man, but Bismack Biyombo? Give me a break.

              Again, none of these guys IMO, are worth losing what Stuckey brings you or giving up your cap space next offseason. You can address this need much more effectively this coming summer.


              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                You don't care about the record, you're not complaining about the team's performance, you're not complaining about the product............yet you're still very mad at Bird.

                Seems to me like there's just no way Bird can objectively win in your book regardless of how the team performs. It looks to me like you'll stay mad at him for a long time because he traded away a player who you liked a lot and you didn't like the way it went down. I don't see how you can give Bird much of a fair shake if you don't care about the record, performance, or the product.
                Well, I don't know if mad is the right way to put it. It feels a bit too strong. Let's just call it not happy. I'm not happy with Bird for a number of reasons. One of the reasons I'm not happy with Bird is because to me, at least, it seems like he's putting his ego above the interests of the team. The way he handled the post-season presser and the way he handled the spat with PG show me that he cares more about showing everyone that he's the boss than about the Pacers winning.

                Now, let's clarify something about the process I mentioned in the post you quoted. The process isn't the product per se but it does affect it. The process that I didn't like this off-season was Bird's insistence on signing wings. That has created an imbalance in the roster. We have more wings than we need to have and we have less bigs than we need to have. That's what I disliked the most this off-season. The roster imbalances that Bird's changes created. This is the process I was referring to.

                The reason I differentiated this process from the product is that the results of this process (in other words, the roster imbalances) aren't going to change regardless of our record and our team's performance. What I'm trying to say is that you can still have a good record while being an imbalanced team and conversely that you can still have a bad record while being a balanced team. Being 12-3 or 5-9 doesn't change that. This is why my criticism of Bird was the same as it is now when we were 0-3.

                If you're asking me how can we be an imbalanced team but still have a good record I have two words for you. Frank Vogel and Paul George. Frank knows how to make his players buy in and PG is one the league's top players. Do you want another example of an imbalanced team? The big 3 Heat. They were imbalanced as hell but they are still gonna go down as a dynasty (albeit a short-lived one) because LeBron was that good.

                So, no, being an imbalanced team doesn't necessarily make you a bad team. But that doesn't mean that I have to like the fact that we're imbalanced.

                Lastly, you said that there's no way for Bird to objectively win in my book. That isn't true. There are two ways for it to happen:

                1) Build a balanced team. All he has to do is to go after some capable bigs next off-season.

                2) Prove that his new version is better than the old one. The 12-13 Pacers went to game 7 of the ECF. Surpass that and I'll have no reason to be unhappy.

                PS: Not that any NBA executive cares about winning in a fan's book. I'm just borrowing the phrasing you used. I have no delusions of grandeur
                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
                  Nunt, I love ya man, but Bismack Biyombo? Give me a break.
                  Well, he is a rim protector. He isn't anything special (not yet at least) but he can be useful.

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  You can address this need much more effectively this coming summer.
                  Let's hope that we address this need in the summer then.
                  Last edited by Nuntius; 11-23-2015, 09:42 PM.
                  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 Nuntius View Post
                    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.
                    When healthy we wouldn't have the minutes for an extra big. There is no gap for a 3rd string big.

                    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.
                    I know this stat was floating around before Turner injury, but can't be used now. We're still playing well with only 3 bigs and JHill now the backup center.

                    Comment


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

                      Nun, I really don't understand why there is any criticism for Bird. Pacer fans are pretty darn luck that he was able to move Hibbert without giving up assets and transition an old/slow team to the future with flexibility.

                      West didn't want to be here. Hibbert was/is declining. We don't have playing time for an extra big when healthy. CJ Miles has been defending power forwards pretty well for the most part.

                      I just don't really understand when you say the process upsets you. The process is looking pretty good.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                        Nun, I really don't understand why there is any criticism for Bird. Pacer fans are pretty darn luck that he was able to move Hibbert without giving up assets and transition an old/slow team to the future with flexibility.

                        West didn't want to be here. Hibbert was/is declining. We don't have playing time for an extra big when healthy. CJ Miles has been defending power forwards pretty well for the most part.

                        I just don't really understand when you say the process upsets you. The process is looking pretty good.
                        I loved the Big Dog, and really wanted him to succeed given his challenges. I desperately wanted him to prove the naysayers wrong.

                        I loved it when he actually stepped up to his max contract during the early part of the 4 years. He looked like a revelation at times between New York and Miami during the playoffs.

                        He felt like part of the family. The so-called family that I feel like I'm a part of when I spend a part of almost every day reading about the Pacers.

                        So when Bird called him out the way he did at first, it upset me.. to be honest. It didn't feel fair. It also seemed odd, given that our power post strategy largely focused upon him... we were getting so close to the trophy we could taste it, etc etc. Why would they deliberately move away from a strategy that distinguished us and that worked for us as a franchise?

                        You can't do that sort of thing to family, and you're moving in a direction that makes no sense to me.

                        But then I remembered that it was Bird that was making these calls, and that he deserved the benefit of the doubt.

                        Then I moved past the emotional response and I tried to look at the facts from the past couple of years... and left that recognizing that he was doing the right thing in the end. The window had closed, and I hadn't been willing to see that even though the signs were popping up all around us.

                        I'll never be totally happy with how the situation was handled towards the end, but thank god I'm so perfect eh?

                        I also talked with a couple of fairly senior people in PS&E and they *universally* were super happy we were done with him. He was so inconsistent because of his emotional swings. Had an argument with his fiancee? He'd play bad for a couple of games. Get in an argument with his teammates? Cratered confidence. Required a lot of hand holding and patience. Drove a lot of the support staff crazy.

                        Why am I saying all of this? Mainly because I think a fan's feelings about these sorts of things are complicated, and can be based around all sorts of things, including emotional investments, facts, dreams, etc. I think a lot of the reason we talk cross purpose with each other a lot on this board relates to people being focused on different dimensions of how we'd size up players and the team.
                        Last edited by docpaul; 11-23-2015, 10:30 PM.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                          Nun, I really don't understand why there is any criticism for Bird. Pacer fans are pretty darn luck that he was able to move Hibbert without giving up assets and transition an old/slow team to the future with flexibility.

                          West didn't want to be here. Hibbert was/is declining. We don't have playing time for an extra big when healthy. CJ Miles has been defending power forwards pretty well for the most part.

                          I just don't really understand when you say the process upsets you. The process is looking pretty good.
                          He got rid of our bigs without properly replacing them and then he went on and signed more wings than we ever needed. There is a clear roster imbalance. You have every right in the world to be fine with it. Personally, I'm not fine with 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 Nuntius View Post
                            Well, I don't know if mad is the right way to put it. It feels a bit too strong. Let's just call it not happy. I'm not happy with Bird for a number of reasons. One of the reasons I'm not happy with Bird is because to me, at least, it seems like he's putting his ego above the interests of the team. The way he handled the post-season presser and the way he handled the spat with PG show me that he cares more about showing everyone that he's the boss than about the Pacers winning.

                            Now, let's clarify something about the process I mentioned in the post you quoted. The process isn't the product per se but it does affect it. The process that I didn't like this off-season was Bird's insistence on signing wings. That has created an imbalance in the roster. We have more wings than we need to have and we have less bigs than we need to have. That's what I disliked the most this off-season. The roster imbalances that Bird's changes created. This is the process I was referring to.

                            The reason I differentiated this process from the product is that the results of this process (in other words, the roster imbalances) aren't going to change regardless of our record and our team's performance. What I'm trying to say is that you can still have a good record while being an imbalanced team and conversely that you can still have a bad record while being a balanced team. Being 12-3 or 5-9 doesn't change that. This is why my criticism of Bird was the same as it is now when we were 0-3.

                            If you're asking me how can we be an imbalanced team but still have a good record I have two words for you. Frank Vogel and Paul George. Frank knows how to make his players buy in and PG is one the league's top players. Do you want another example of an imbalanced team? The big 3 Heat. They were imbalanced as hell but they are still gonna go down as a dynasty (albeit a short-lived one) because LeBron was that good.

                            So, no, being an imbalanced team doesn't necessarily make you a bad team. But that doesn't mean that I have to like the fact that we're imbalanced.

                            Lastly, you said that there's no way for Bird to objectively win in my book. That isn't true. There are two ways for it to happen:

                            1) Build a balanced team. All he has to do is to go after some capable bigs next off-season.

                            2) Prove that his new version is better than the old one. The 12-13 Pacers went to game 7 of the ECF. Surpass that and I'll have no reason to be unhappy.

                            PS: Not that any NBA executive cares about winning in a fan's book. I'm just borrowing the phrasing you used. I have no delusions of grandeur
                            I've bolded the two biggest problem with your thinking here.

                            First, during the Hibbert/West era the Pacers were the most unbalance team in the NBA. All defense and no offense. I don't care how many bigs you deem to be quality, a balanced NBA team is good at both offense and defense. The Pacers, as currently constructed, can be elite defensively and above average or better offensively...that's balance.

                            Second, why does Bird have to prove the old version is better than the new one? It's not Bird's fault West got old. It's not Bird's fault West didn't want to start anymore. It's not Bird's fault Hibbert declined and was bringing down morale in the locker room. Blaming a GM for a team rebuild and holding that GM up to the standard of the former team at it's peak, is like blaming Pat Riley for not having a replacement ready for Lebron to take the Heat back to the Finals.

                            It's a real shame people are unhappy with the process, because to me, that's the most fun part. Watching how a team is put together and how young players end up contributing and growing is my favorite part. We're lucky Bird is good enough to do this on the fly, lucky to have Vogel, and extremely lucky to have PG. I would suggest getting happy with the process because this looks like Bird is building something special.
                            Last edited by freddielewis14; 11-23-2015, 10:35 PM.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              He got rid of our bigs without properly replacing them and then he went on and signed more wings than we ever needed. There is a clear roster imbalance. You have every right in the world to be fine with it. Personally, I'm not fine with it.
                              See my post about balance.

                              AND HE DID NOT GET RID OF OUR BIGS. West did not want to or was not capable of being a starting power forward.

                              Hibbert was on the decline.

                              We replaced Hibbert with Turner. We replaced West with JHill. Those are more than fine replacements for those players.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                                He got rid of our bigs without properly replacing them and then he went on and signed more wings than we ever needed. There is a clear roster imbalance. You have every right in the world to be fine with it. Personally, I'm not fine with it.
                                So do you think we'd be better with no Monta/JHill/Stuckey etc but kept Hibbert/West? I personally fine that ridiculous. I mean West is simply not what he was 2 years ago. I'm sorry but father time is catching up with him. If he were still that player he'd be playing more than 15 minutes a game in San Antonio.

                                Hibbert was always a good defensive center, but his offense was way too inconsistent. He is slightly better than Mahinmi at this point to be honest.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X