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

18th pick

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

  • Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

    Thumb surgery and back injury was caused by merely playing the game. Medical results show nothing long term regarding his back....
    This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If playing led to his back injury - might not more playing just do the same thing ??

    And besides - I watched him play a few times this year and he just never stood out from any of the other guys on the court. My guess is that whomever gets him early is going to be disappointed.

    But - I'm not a doctor or a scout.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      Interesting but he might be gone by then


      Thanks for the link. This guys draft analyses are AWESOME. New Thunderbird?


      Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

      Comment


      • Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

        This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If playing led to his back injury - might not more playing just do the same thing ??

        And besides - I watched him play a few times this year and he just never stood out from any of the other guys on the court. My guess is that whomever gets him early is going to be disappointed.

        But - I'm not a doctor or a scout.
        I agree with you about watching him play this year. Nothing special stood out other than flashes of good play. But, remember, the Pacers have the 18th pick. It's not like we should have a lot of expectation for whoever gets drafted at that point. Langford falling to 18 would be a better choice than Sekou Doumbouya or Grant Williams or a more normal 18th pick. Langford has some talent, even if he didn't show that much at IU.

        Comment


        • Did you also notice that IU played better when he was out ?? They looked fairly decent in the NIT while he was 'resting his back'.

          And no - I don't buy that excuse either.

          Comment


          • I watched a lot of Romeo this year and absolutely love the guy. Even when his shot wasn't falling he was up pressuring the ball, getting deflections, and contesting shots. His defensive awareness is pretty advanced for his age. He closes out well and picks up his man when rebounding. That's all going to translate well to the NBA.Also I think people underestimate fluidity and solid body mechanics. Look at the all major ball handling stars today and almost none have a "herky-jerky" motion about the way they move or the way they shoot. Even with his hitch, it's amazing how fluid his shot is. If he's durable in the NBA, he's going to be good.

            Comment


            • I wouldn't take him with the 18th pick but I hope that Aubrey Dawkins from Central Florida is still on the board in round 2. He seems like he could contribute right away.

              Comment


              • Looking at the Bucks as the future of the eastern conference you are looking at a tall and long team.

                Pacers should be looking at long athletic guys, future Giannis stoppers.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • https://stats.nba.com/draft/combine-...onYear=2019-20

                  RECENT FILTERS GLOSSARY SHARE
                  Zion Williamson PF -% - - -
                  Zach Norvell Jr. SG 7.50% 8.50 9.50 6' 4.5'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 5'' 206.4 6' 6''
                  Tyler Herro SG 7.10% 8.00 8.75 6' 4.5'' 6' 6'' 8' 4.5'' 192.4 6' 3.25''
                  Tyler Cook PF 6.10% 9.50 10.75 6' 7.25'' 6' 8.75'' 8' 10.5'' 245.4 7' 0.5''
                  Ty Jerome PG 6.50% 8.25 9.50 6' 4.25'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 2'' 194.4 6' 4''
                  Tremont Waters PG 6.60% 8.00 9.75 5' 9.5'' 5' 10.75'' 7' 9.5'' 172.4 6' 2.25''
                  Terence Davis SG 4.10% 9.25 10.75 6' 3'' 6' 4.5'' 8' 5'' 192.4 6' 8.75''
                  Terance Mann SG-SF 4.00% 9.50 9.25 6' 4.75'' 6' 6.5'' 8' 5'' 204.6 6' 7.75''
                  Talen Horton-Tucker SG 8.40% 9.50 9.75 6' 2.5'' 6' 4'' 8' 7'' 235.4 7' 1.25''
                  Tacko Fall C 6.80% 10.50 10.50 7' 5.25'' 7' 7'' 10' 2.5'' 288.8 8' 2.25''
                  Simisola Shittu PF 6.20% 8.75 8.50 6' 8.5'' 6' 9.5'' 8' 10'' 227.2 7' 1.25''
                  Shamorie Ponds PG 9.80% 7.75 8.00 5' 11.5'' 6' 0.5'' 8' 0.5'' 180.0 6' 3.5''
                  Romeo Langford SG -% 9.00 9.00 6' 4.5'' 6' 6'' 8' 7'' - 6' 11''
                  Reggie Perry SF-PF 6.70% 9.00 10.00 6' 8'' 6' 9.25'' 8' 10'' 250.8 7' 0.5''
                  RJ Barrett SF -% - - -
                  Quinndary Weatherspoon SG 6.10% 8.50 9.00 6' 3'' 6' 4.25'' 8' 4'' 206.6 6' 9''
                  Quentin Grimes SG 8.40% 8.25 10.00 6' 4'' 6' 5.25'' 8' 4.5'' 209.6 6' 7.75''
                  P.J. Washington PF 8.60% 9.00 10.25 6' 6.5'' 6' 8'' 8' 10.5'' 230.4 7' 2.25''
                  Oshea Brissett SF-PF 2.90% 9.00 9.50 6' 7'' 6' 8'' 8' 8'' 203.2 7' 0''
                  Nicolas Claxton C 4.50% 9.25 9.50 6' 10'' 6' 11.75'' 9' 2'' 216.6 7' 2.5''
                  Nickeil Alexander-Walker SG 5.90% 8.50 8.75 6' 4.25'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 6'' 203.8 6' 9.5''
                  Neemias Queta C 6.30% 9.50 11.00 6' 10.75'' 7' 0.25'' 9' 3.5'' 225.8 7' 4.25''
                  Naz Reid PF 14.00% 9.50 9.25 6' 8.75'' 6' 9.5'' 9' 1'' 255.8 7' 3.25''
                  Nassir Little SF 5.90% 8.75 10.00 6' 4.5'' 6' 6'' 8' 8.5'' 224.2 7' 1.25''
                  Moses Brown C 7.80% 9.50 10.25 7' 1.25'' 7' 2.5'' 9' 5'' 237.2 7' 4.75''
                  Miye Oni SG 4.90% 9.00 10.00 6' 4.25'' 6' 5.75'' 8' 4.5'' 205.6 6' 10.75''
                  Mfiondu Kabengele PF 5.10% 9.25 10.75 6' 8.75'' 6' 10.25'' 9' 1.5'' 256.2 7' 3''
                  Marial Shayok SF-PF 4.70% 8.75 9.25 6' 4.5'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 7.5'' 196.8 7' 0.25''
                  Luka Samanic PF 5.60% 8.50 9.00 6' 9.5'' 6' 11'' 8' 11'' 227.2 6' 10.5''
                  Luguentz Dort PG 5.00% 8.50 9.00 6' 2.75'' 6' 4.25'' 8' 3.5'' 222.2 6' 8.5''
                  Louis King SF 4.80% 8.00 8.50 6' 6.75'' 6' 8'' 8' 8.5'' 195.2 7' 0.25''
                  Kyle Guy SG 5.70% 8.00 8.75 6' 0.75'' 6' 2.25'' 7' 11.5'' 167.8 6' 4.5''
                  Ky Bowman PG 4.90% 8.25 9.00 6' 1'' 6' 2.25'' 8' 2'' 181.2 6' 7''
                  Kris Wilkes SF 4.90% 8.50 9.50 6' 6.25'' 6' 7.75'' 8' 7'' 208.8 6' 10.75''
                  Killian Tillie -% - - -
                  Kevin Porter Jr. SG 5.10% 8.75 8.75 6' 4'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 7'' 212.6 6' 9''
                  Keldon Johnson SG 5.60% 8.00 9.25 6' 4.75'' 6' 6'' 8' 8'' 216.4 6' 9.25''
                  KZ Okpala SF 4.60% 9.25 9.25 6' 7.25'' 6' 9.5'' 8' 10.5'' 209.6 7' 1.75''
                  Jordan Poole SG 7.50% 8.25 8.50 6' 3.5'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 3.5'' 190.8 6' 6.75''
                  Jordan Nwora PF 7.80% 8.50 9.25 6' 5.75'' 6' 7.5'' 8' 7'' 220.0 6' 10.5''
                  Jordan Bone SG 5.00% 7.50 9.25 6' 1.5'' 6' 2.75'' 7' 11'' 179.0 6' 3.25''
                  Jontay Porter PF 8.50% 8.75 9.50 6' 9.75'' 6' 11'' 9' 1.5'' 210.4 7' 0''
                  Jaylen Nowell SG 6.10% 8.25 8.50 6' 3.25'' 6' 4.25'' 8' 2'' 202.4 6' 7.25''
                  Jaylen Hands PG 5.10% 8.00 8.25 6' 1.5'' 6' 3'' 8' 1'' 180.4 6' 5.5''
                  Jaxson Hayes PF 5.00% 9.25 10.50 6' 10.25'' 6' 11.5'' 9' 2.5'' 218.6 7' 3.5''
                  Jarrett Culver SG 5.00% 8.25 8.50 6' 5.25'' 6' 6.75'' 8' 4.5'' 194.2 6' 9.5''
                  Jared Harper PG 3.90% 8.25 9.50 5' 9.75'' 5' 11'' 7' 10'' 169.2 6' 5.5''
                  Jalen McDaniels SF 5.70% 9.00 10.00 6' 8.25'' 6' 9.75'' 8' 9.5'' 191.6 7' 0.25''
                  Jalen Lecque PG 4.00% 8.75 8.50 6' 2.5'' 6' 4.25'' 8' 2.5'' 185.2 6' 8.5''
                  Jalen Hoard PF 6.70% 8.75 9.75 6' 7.25'' 6' 9'' 8' 9.5'' 212.6 7' 0.75''
                  Ja Morant PG -% - - -
                  Isaiah Roby PF 3.90% 9.00 10.50 6' 7.25'' 6' 8.5'' 8' 10'' 214.0 7' 1''
                  Ignas Brazdeikis SF 6.00% 8.75 9.50 6' 5.75'' 6' 7.25'' 8' 6'' 220.8 6' 9.25''
                  Grant Williams PF 5.40% 9.00 10.50 6' 5.75'' 6' 7.5'' 8' 8.5'' 240.2 6' 9.75''
                  Eric Paschall SF 6.30% 9.00 9.50 6' 6'' 6' 7.25'' 8' 7.5'' 254.4 6' 11.75''
                  Dylan Windler SF 4.60% 8.25 9.50 6' 6.25'' 6' 7.5'' 8' 8.5'' 195.8 6' 10''
                  Dewan Hernandez C 6.10% 9.50 10.25 6' 9'' 6' 10.25'' 8' 11'' 232.8 7' 1.75''
                  Devon Dotson PG 5.90% 8.25 9.50 6' 0'' 6' 2'' 7' 11.5'' 178.6 6' 3.25''
                  Dedric Lawson PF 8.90% 9.75 9.75 6' 7'' 6' 8.5'' 8' 11.5'' 233.0 7' 2.25''
                  De'Andre Hunter -% - - -
                  Darius Garland PG -% - - -
                  Darius Bazley PF 3.60% 9.00 9.75 6' 7.75'' 6' 9'' 8' 11'' 208.4 7' 0''
                  Daniel Gafford PF 5.90% 9.25 9.25 6' 9.25'' 6' 10.5'' 9' 2'' 237.6 7' 2.25''
                  DaQuan Jefferies SF-PF 3.90% 9.50 10.25 6' 4'' 6' 5'' 8' 8'' 215.6 6' 11.25''
                  Cody Martin PG-SG 5.00% 8.25 9.00 6' 4.75'' 6' 5.5'' 8' 6.5'' 192.2 6' 10.25''
                  Coby White PG 4.30% 7.75 9.00 6' 3.5'' 6' 4.75'' 8' 1.5'' 191.4 6' 5''
                  Chuma Okeke -% - - -
                  Charles Matthews SG 3.80% 8.50 8.75 6' 5'' 6' 6.25'' 8' 7'' 194.8 6' 9.5''
                  Charles Bassey C 8.50% 9.25 9.50 6' 8.75'' 6' 10'' 9' 1.5'' 239.0 7' 3.5''
                  Carsen Edwards PG 5.50% 8.75 9.00 5' 10.75'' 6' 0.25'' 7' 10.5'' 199.4 6' 6''
                  Cameron Reddish SF 4.70% 9.00 9.00 6' 6.5'' 6' 8'' 8' 9.5'' 207.8 7' 0.5''
                  Cameron Johnson SG 5.80% 8.00 8.50 6' 7'' 6' 8.5'' 8' 7'' 205.2 6' 10''
                  Bruno Fernando C 5.40% 9.25 10.00 6' 8.75'' 6' 10.25'' 9' 2'' 237.0 7' 3.25''
                  Brian Bowen II SF 6.50% 8.50 9.75 6' 6.25'' 6' 7.5'' 8' 7'' 200.0 6' 10''
                  Brandon Clarke SF 4.90% 8.25 9.50 6' 7.25'' 6' 8.25'' 8' 6'' 207.2 6' 8.25''
                  Bol Bol C 7.10% 9.25 9.50 7' 0.75'' 7' 2.5'' 9' 7.5'' 208.0 7' 7''
                  Admiral Schofield SF 6.80% 8.75 9.00 6' 4'' 6' 5.25'' 8' 6.5'' 240.6 6' 9.75''
                  Last edited by owl; 05-18-2019, 06:31 PM.
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • The columns are body fat %, Hand length-Hand width-Height no shoes-Height with shoes-Standing reach-Weight-Wingspan
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Looking at the Bucks as the future of the eastern conference you are looking at a tall and long team.

                      Pacers should be looking at long athletic guys, future Giannis stoppers.
                      Draft Bol Bol and Tacko Fall and have Sabonis at point and VO at shooting guard and Myles at PF and Bol at SF.
                      I am sorta kidding as the Pacers as you have noted need to get long and athletic.
                      Haha..everywhere you go you have a shot blocker in your face
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

                        This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If playing led to his back injury - might not more playing just do the same thing ??

                        And besides - I watched him play a few times this year and he just never stood out from any of the other guys on the court. My guess is that whomever gets him early is going to be disappointed.

                        But - I'm not a doctor or a scout.
                        Back injury meaning that he hurt it while playing. No different when someone sprain their ankle or get hit with an accidental elbow. A little ice and rest should rectify the situation. Now, if he had back surgery, then that's a different story. The only surgery that he had was on his torn ligament in his thumb.

                        I guess I'm saying that his injury is not chronic.


                        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post

                          I agree with you about watching him play this year. Nothing special stood out other than flashes of good play. But, remember, the Pacers have the 18th pick. It's not like we should have a lot of expectation for whoever gets drafted at that point. Langford falling to 18 would be a better choice than Sekou Doumbouya or Grant Williams or a more normal 18th pick. Langford has some talent, even if he didn't show that much at IU.
                          Paul George didn't look like anything special either when he left college. However, one thing I was noticing when I was watching his pre-draft videos back then, was how he moved.

                          Romeo has a certain grace about him when he penetrate that makes his movements seem effortless.


                          Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Looking at the Bucks as the future of the eastern conference you are looking at a tall and long team.

                            Pacers should be looking at long athletic guys, future Giannis stoppers.
                            And that's one reason why I'm not sold on getting Kemba Walker or Michael Conley. Our last good Pacers team aged out quickly, because the NBA changed and running a traditional center didn't make sense anymore. This time around, I want the Pacers to be the ahead of the 8-ball.


                            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                            Comment


                            • If Romeo falls to 18, I think you have to seriously consider taking him. I don't know what his issue was at IU, but if it was health then we just got a steal. If it was mental, I think Vic will rub off on him, and show him what it takes to be great.

                              Comment


                              • I like KZ Okpala & Nickeil Alexander-Walker.

                                KZ Okpala is 6'9 with a near 7'2 wingspan. He is a combo forward & could be equally as good at each position. He has an upside of Khris Middleton (speaking of Milwaukee) & to me a ceiling around Al Farouq-Aminu.

                                Alexander-walker is a 6'5 guard with a 6'9 1/2 wingspan. He isn't uber athletic, but has great length, is a very efficient scorer & can comfortably play either guard spot. He is quite slender, but is only 20yrs old so still growing into his body. Could be a Spencer Dinwiddie/George Hill type player as a ceiling, potential starter or solid 6th man.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X