Tweet
Originally posted by yoadknux
View Post
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.
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
-
The answer to that is no.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
-
I think with Oladipo, we were ECF contenders. Without him, we're somewhere between there and 1st round exit. I'll never count this team out, even if a lot of folks think they're ceiling isn't high. They have 1 thing better than any other EC team, and that is chemistry, and that can take you places.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Contenders for what? Championship? We’d be double digit underdogs in every single game vs Golden State. We’d be like +2500 to win the series. We’d get swept.
We’re going to play Boston or Philly in round 1. We’ll win 1 game. Series will end in 5. If we’re lucky we take it 6 games. Oladipo injury screwed us out of a 2nd round playoff series. If Dipo doesn’t go down, we end up as the 3-seed & we would’ve beaten Brooklyn in 6-7 games, and then lost to Toronto in 6 maybe 7 games. Would’ve been a fun playoff run no matter what....now it won’t be so fun. That injury screwed us out of what would’ve been a fun ride this April. And then we could’ve seen a top tier free agent want to sign here to put us over the top...now FA’s are going to be hesitant to sign with not knowing if Vic will return to an all-star level of when he’ll return at all. That Dipo injury changed the course of this franchise. Well feel the effects of that for years to comeComment
-
I’ve acceptwd the fact we’ll never win a title. I’m just happy we’ve got a team. We could be Seattle or any other city without an NBA team. Its nice following the team, just being a fan & being able to leave my house, travel 15 miles & be in my seat within 25 minutes for the price of what it costs to attend a high school basketball game.Comment
-
I agree. The way this is playing out is very similar to Boston’s season last year. Terry Rozier, Jayson Tatum, and Jaylen Brown all took a huge step forward while the grizzled vets played lockdown defense and unselfish offense.Originally posted by sportfireman View Post
If the Pacers weren’t such a good defensive team, I would say they have no chance. Without Vic, they’ve maintained their top-2 ranked defense. Great defense will always give you a punchers chance to pull an upset. I feel like the Pacers coaching staff is copying Brad Stevens’s playbook and it could wind up working for at least the 1st-round - if they have HCA.Comment
-
Right now? No. I don't think that anyone claims we are contenders right now.
Before Vic's injury? Not contenders to make the Finals but we were definitely at a level where we could make a good run in the second round and maybe (if everything went our way) make it to the ECF.
In two years' time? Possibly.
We are in a very good position as a team. We have a 26 year old star in Victor Oladipo who is locked in a great contract until the summer of 2021. We have an emerging 22 year old Center in Myles Turner who is locked in a steal of a contract until the summer of 2023. We have another emerging 22 year old PF/C in Domantas Sabonis who is still on a rookie deal and I fully expect us to offer him a long-term deal this summer. We also have some very decent prospects in Aaron Holiday, Edmond Sumner and Alize Johnson. We will also have enough cap space for at least one max deal and we don't owe any first-round picks (we only owe a second round pick).
I don't see how anyone could see that as being in a bad position. We have a good, young core, we have financial flexibility and we have our picks. It's all on KP's hands now. What he needs to do is to bring in one more guy who is at the level of our core players and then surround those 4 with good role players. Do that and in two years' time we'll have enough to win 55-60 games and then make and possibly win the ECF.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
I fully expect the Pacers to win the first round of the playoff, with a 50 50 chance in the 2nd round.Go Pacers!Comment
-
You're certainly living up to your title, Bobby. I appreciate you a lot for itOriginally posted by BobbyMac View Post
Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
If we can upgrade our PG spot with keeping most of the roster together then we should start to be hugely competitive.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
The more Turner plays this year the more I think he is suited to play that PF spot, he is an extremely under-rated athlete & he isn't quite physical enough for the Embiid's & Jokic's of the league. Offensively he isn't going to be a creator, but defensively he is pretty sharp & if his man beats him he has that insane ability to block their shot at the rim. His foot speed seems to be ever improving, no reason he couldn't guard most PF's in the league. Giannis scores on everyone, but if Boston is happy putting Horford onto him no reason Turneer can't do the same - he is longer, younger & more agile (Horford has a very shot wingspan)
C. Sabonis
PF. Turner
SF. Bogdanovic
SG. Oladipo
PG. 2-way Guard
I want to keep a bench of Joseph, Holiday & Leaf as well.Last edited by festar35; 02-08-2019, 11:17 PM.Comment
-
My definition of a contender is a team that gets to the conference finals. 9 times out of 10 if you make it to the conference finals you are a legit contender. Occasionally due mostly to circumstance someone makes it who isn't a contender, but it isn't common. I think if we somehow got to the ECF we would be that 1 out 10 who makes it who isn't actually a contender.Comment
-
I wouldn't be disappointed if we got Rozier but he wouldn't be my first option. My first option would be Kemba. I'd try to sell him on winning. Kemba is a great player but his Hornets have only made the playoffs twice. I'd sell him on the fact that this team has a proven track record of making the post-season and performing well in them even amidst roster turnover. I'd sell him on your young core and our defensive identity. I'd try to convince him that with him we could make a lot of deep playoff runs that would culminate in a Finals appearance (something that I also believe could happen if we landed Kemba).Originally posted by festar35 View Post
My second option would be Middleton and my third option would be trading for Taurean Prince. Prince is obviously not in the Middleton tier yet but don't forget that Middleton didn't explode until his 4th year. Prince's scoring numbers this season are very similar with Middleton's 3rd year in the league (13.4 PPG on 11 FGA for Middleton, 13.7 PPG on 10.9 FGA for Prince). I believe that Prince can develop into this kind of guy. A 2nd/3rd option with great defense. Atlanta has made him available in trades due to the emergence of Kevin Huerter. The Hawks, as a rebuilding team, are looking for future assets. I'd gladly trade them this year's 1st along with someone like Leaf (people in this forum may not like him a lot but he's still a really young who also fits Atlanta's 3-point shooting philosophy).
As far as our FAs are concerned, I'd look to bring back Bojan and CoJo. Thad is a great, great player and I've loved what he has done for us in the past 2-3 months. He is a true leader. I'd love to keep him and have him come off the bench. But I don't trust Nate to not start him. Domas has to start next season. We either start him or we trade him. We can't have him come off the bench forever. He is too good and he will eventually become disgruntled. So, he has to start next season. In all honesty, he should have been starting for a long time now but the least we could do is start him next season. Starting Domas at PF (because, similarly, Myles is too good to come off the bench) means that Thad doesn't start. I am 100% sure that Thad has no issue to come off the bench and that he'd do it if we asked him to do it (he's a pro's pro after all) but I don't trust Nate to go through with it. Thad is Nate's security blanket. I would only bring Thad back if I got a guarantee from Nate that he wouldn't start him ahead of Domas.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
I would absolutely love Kemba on this roster, it would be a hard sell to get him here, but the fact that Charlotte achieved nothing at the deadline could mean he is thinking about having a look elsewhere.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
Middleton is another great option, but I don't know why he would leave a winning franchise they are at the top of the East & I know we probably would be with him on the team as well but I think he would be smart to go back to Milwaukee. Love Taurean Prince & pretty sure we've had this conversation, but is he an upgrade over Bogdanovic? We would have to pay him after next year as well.
100% agree on our free agents & have the same feelings about Thaddeus Young.
Maybe we can have Taurean come off the bench:
C. Sabonis
PF. Turner
SF. Bogdanovic
SG. Oladipo
PG. Joseph
Prince
Holiday
Leaf
Sumner
R.Lopez (Cheap 3rd string C)
I really want us to trade McDermott, not because I don't like him but because we don't use him the way he should be.Last edited by festar35; 02-09-2019, 12:14 AM.Comment
-
I’d overpay for Malcom Brogdon just to get him here. Stealing Middleton & Brogdon away from Milwaukee would be great. No way were signing Kemba...I don’t see him leaving Charlotte but if he does he’ll go to a larger market.
Middleton has said he wants to retire in Milwaukee. Brogdon is the type of player I could see us landing....that’s about as big of a FA as we’re going to get. A couple other free agents who fit what we do: Harrison Barnes, Terrance Ross. Those guys would be huge gets for us.id be down for RFA Bobby Portis & Kelly Oubre Jr. as well....but I just remembered we don’t sign RFA’s. It’s rude. Treat others how you’d like to be treated. Aka, we won’t sign your RFA’s so don’t sign ours.
Comment
-
On Middleton: Middleton would be a tough sell, I agree. The main hope we'd have of getting him would be if the Bucks went out in the 2nd round. Middleton is up for an extension and the same goes for Bledsoe, Brogdon, Lopez and Mirotić (they gave up four second round picks for him, I don't think they view him as a rental, they probably view him as a replacement for Brook Lopez). They can go over the cap to sign their own guys but will they go so much over the luxury cap (add those 5 contracts to Giannis' 25 mil and the combined 18 mil they owe to Snell/Ilyasova and you get a figure around 160-170) if the team doesn't produce in the playoffs? It's unlikely.Originally posted by festar35 View Post
Middleton has 7 years experience. That means that he is eligible for a max that is up to 30% of the salary cap. The cap is projected to be around 109 mil next season which means that his max will be a bit more than 30 mil per year. Will they offer him that kind of deal? I think that it's doubtful. We could do it, though, and that could be our main selling point if we decide to go for him. "Come here and you can get your max money while playing with a team that has the potential to make it to the Finals". That's not a bad sell at all.
On Prince: I'd say that right now he's not an upgrade over Bogdanović . But he is 5 years younger than him and that's why I'd go for it. Prince is 24 years old. He fits the age window of our young core. He won't be past his prime when Dipo and our two young bigs are at their primes. He is also 6'8 with a 6'11.5" wingspan and the athletic tools to be a great defender. He has also proved that he can average 14 points per game in this league. If he can develop into a 2-way player that can give us consistent outside shooting (not like Bojan's 43% but around 40%) along with great defense then I'd go for it. He also offers some positional flexibility as he can slide in as a small-ball PF. His length allows him to play bigger than he is and he is a pretty good defensive rebounder for his position. His career Defensive Rebound Rate is 14.6. For a comparison, Thad's career Defensive Rebound Rate is 14.7. Thad is obviously the much better overall rebounder, don't get me wrong, since he is great at getting offensive boards and that's something that Taurean Prince doesn't do but still, having wings that can grab defensive rebounds is something that we do want.
On McDermott: I agree. I believe that he is a better player than what he's shown with us and that he's worth his contract. However, we haven't used him well at all. I believe that we should have been involving him in a lot more DHOs with Domas as he always plays well when we involve him with those. When we don't do that, though, and we just have him stand in the corner, he tends to not produce anything. It's not his 3-point percentage that is the issue. 39% is still a pretty good mark. It's the complete lack of everything else. Rebounding, defense, some playmaking and, in general, any kind of activity that contributes to wins. When we don't involve him in those DHOs, he doesn't do any of that. If we can't find a way to involve him in those plays more often then we may as well trade him.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
I don't see Kemba leaving Charlotte either and that's because I believe he's wired differently. He strikes me as a very loyal and competitive guy that wants to win on his own terms. That's why I don't see him teaming up with another star or going to a large market to play second fiddle to someone. That's why I think that if he leaves (which is a pretty big if, huge chance is that he stays in Charlotte) then he'll go to a small market that doesn't have a huge star but has a good supporting cast. We're a team that fits this description and I believe that we can sell him on this.Originally posted by I Love P View Post
Again, I don't believe that this will be easy and I think that Kemba is much, much more likely to stay but it's worth a shot.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
Comment