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:
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

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

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by sav View Post

    Sumner is a PG/SG. Alize is an undersized PF...I don't think he can play many minutes and be effective at SF, can he?

    Winslow has played SF and some PG and I think even some small ball 4 for Miami this season. He is an athletic 3 and D wing which is what I think we need if we are starting Turner and Sabonis. Obviously I would like to find someone better but if we can't I'd gladly trade a 2nd for Winslow.
    Alize is a good player. His fit in the NBA is probably why he went so low in the draft. I'd compare him to Niang, too slow footed for the SF position but too small for the PF position. But who knows, the Jazz found a way to use Niang.


    • #77
      Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post

      Talked with a few friends that are in the ISU athletic department to get some insight. They believe he'll be a good NBA player but he's a few years out. PJ Tucker level is what I got. I'll definitely take that. If we keep BB, we'll have him and Doug in front of him to give some development time. IMO, it would be a good pick for the future.
      Thanks for the inside info. Tucker is slightly taller and more of a sf or pf. This kid plays as a guard which I find vey intriguing. I like players who break the mold of what a player should look like for their position.
      Last edited by owl; 05-11-2019, 07:51 PM.


      • #78
        Originally posted by owl View Post

        Thanks for the inside info. Tucker is slightly taller and more of a sf or pf. This kid plays as a guard which I find vey intriguing. I like players who break the mold of what a player should look like for their position.
        PJ w
        He played all 5 positions in college but did rotate mainly from p1-4. I see him more as a 3. He's definitely defensive minded which is where the Tucker reference comes from. Shot consistence is where he needs the work. It's weird seeing the mock drafts cause he seems to be all over the place.

        I'm a fan and think it's the risk we truly need. Just worried we don't have the coaching staff for the development


        • #79
          I think the Pacers could look towards the draft to fill that Lance/Tyreke playmaker off the bench role. Players who fit that role would be Nickeil Alexander-Walker, Romeo Langford, Talen Horton-Tucker, Jaylen Nowell (who has a pre draft workout scheduled with the Pacers after the combine), Tyler Herro, and Ty Jerome just off the top of my head who are considered to be first round prospects.


          • #80
            I've been diving deep into draft now that I'm done with school and noticed that Romeo plays almost exactly like Ohio State Evan Turner. Their efficiency statistics and play style tendencies are almost exactly the same across the board. The only major difference is that Romeo is considerably worse in transition. But this is also comparing Romeo's 1st year with Evan Turner's 3rd year. Turner as a freshman was atrocious in transition. Romeo, despite his inconsistencies, is a much better prospect than Evan Turner was in 2010 imo. He's a much better all around player with a deceptively quick first step who finishes at the rim at an elite level. Not to mention his defense projects to be a lot better than ET's.

            Other comparison's in play style include Keldon Johnson as a less shiftier Xavier Henry or a middle-class man's Danny Green. Henry's biggest weakness was his lack of toughness otherwise he'd still be in the NBA. Johnson projects to be purely a spot up shooter and guard only the 2 and 3.

            Nasir Little as Stanley Johnson. Both have all the tools and are high characters but struggled in their lone college season's to improve shooting and ball handling that is necessary to become a complete wing. Both have the tools but struggled mightily on the defensive end as well. I project Little to have a better career because he's a stronger finisher than Johnson but he still will have to come a long way and sometimes no matter how hard a player works, it may not always translate to actual games.

            Talen Horton-Tucker is an enigma. Haven't really seen another player like him. Maybe PJ Tucker with extremely better ball handling? He has all the basics you want from a star wing, the vision, ball handling, and shooting stroke however he was so incredibly inefficient last year. His defense is good and he will definitely guard multiple positions in the NBA but he was incredibly "off" last year on the offensive end. Still he's only a freshman and I could see a team like the Spurs wanting to develop him.

            Cam Johnson is probably one of the best prospects efficiency wise both offensively and defensively since Brogdon in 2016. He reminds me off the NBA version of Doug McDermott on offense and college Brogdon on defense. He'll be 23 at the start of his rookie season but he's so good already I don't think that should matter if you want the best player available. He's a legit 6'8" sharpshooter who can actually defend the perimeter well. If the Pacers somehow get Kemba and have to let Bogie go, I believe Cam would do a great job filling in Bogie's role as an off-screen shooter and spot up scorer.
            Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 05-11-2019, 07:10 PM.


            • #81
              Dylan Windler


              A surprise second rounder and Indy HS grad


              Rick Byrd has seen numerous good players and good athletes come through his programs during a 38-year career that has resulted in an 804-401 record and almost certain entry into basketball’s various halls of fame. While some could make an argument that Byrd -- who has spent the last 33 seasons at Belmont -- has coached better players than Dylan Windler, it’s doubtful he’s ever had a better athlete.

              Byrd, who with Windler’s help just guided Belmont to the school’s first NCAA Tournament at-large bid and first victory in the tournament, has always marveled at Windler’s athleticism. Like a multi-instrumentalist who can play anything he picks up, Windler excels at sports, whether they’re played with a racket, club, bat or just a ball.

              “He’s a great athlete, but also, he just understands how to win,” Byrd says. “He’s our team’s best ping pong player. In softball, he covers the entire outfield and makes plays, and hits it a mile. He was a serious junior golfer and didn’t play AAU basketball until his senior year of high school. He’s also good at soccer and tennis. You could invent a game of some sort -- combining whatever two sports you wanted to -- explain the rules, and Dylan would be the best player at it.”

              That athletic ability, plus a 6-foot-8 frame and a 6-11 wingspan, just might propel Windler into the NBA Draft. He’s consistently showed up in the mock drafts, and his stock rose last week after he blasted Maryland of the rugged Big Ten with 35 points, 21 of them coming from 3-pointers, and 11 rebounds in a first-round NCAA loss.55 people are talking about this
              The Bruins, dispatched to the tournament’s First Four in Dayton, had earned that matchup with the Terps by beating Temple. Windler, obviously drawing extra defensive attention, scored just five points in that game, but he still got his typical allotment of boards (14; he averaged 10.8 this season), along with two assists and three steals. The Owls’ deep concern of Windler going off on them allowed Belmont’s Kevin McClain that honor -- he scored 29 points in the upset victory.

              It was a testament to Windler that whenever Belmont played a power conference team -- they lost to Purdue and won at UCLA this season -- Windler always drew double coverage, and though his points were limited, he understood there were other things he could do to help his team. He scored seven points against the Boilermakers, who have advanced to the NCAA Tournament’s Elite Eight, but contributed 11 boards, three assists and two steals. At UCLA Windler scored just 12 points, nine below his season average, but racked up 15 boards.

              “To his credit, Dylan didn’t try to make it happen when it wasn’t there,” Byrd says. “It gave teammates more opportunities, because nobody’s helping off of him.”

              Byrd admits he doesn’t spend nearly as much time watching the NBA as some of his college counterparts. Other than Ian Clark, he hasn’t coached a player who’s advanced to that level. So Byrd defers judgement whether Windler can play in the NBA.

              “I don’t know enough about that world,” Byrd says. “I watch the NBA some. But I’ll tell you this -- he’s worked out a lot with Ian Clark [who’s played for Utah, Denver, Golden State and New Orleans in an eight-year NBA career], and Ian definitely thinks Dylan can play in the NBA. Ian’s got a reference point I don’t have.”

              Windler has an interesting story. He was so good at so many sports that his best one was overlooked by college coaches. That was with good reason. Until the summer before his senior season at Perry Meridian High School in Indianapolis, Windler thought golf would be his game. During the smmers -- valuable time for high school basketball players to improve and showcase their skills on the AAU circuit -- Windler played in junior golf tournaments.

              In the summer of 2014, Windler, who was trying to decide whether to focus on golf or basketball, got an offer to join the Indiana Elite AAU team, which also included Purdue’s Ryan Cline and Virginia’s Kyle Guy, both of whom are playing for NCAA Tournament Elite Eight teams. Indiana Elite was so loaded Windler was no better than the seventh scoring option. But during one tournament in his hometown, a couple of the team’s stars were off participating in an adidas camp, and Windler was elevated to the starting lineup.

              Suffice it to say he was able to showcase his skills. He left that tournament with 15 Division I scholarship offers. Tennessee Tech was the first to extend an invitation.

              “Once I got a college offer set in stone, I decided basketball was the way to go,” Windler says. “So I went all in on basketball. I trained all the time and was always in the gym getting shots up. And I ended up having a good senior season in high school.”

              By that time, Byrd, who likes to recruit basketball-mad states, which he mines for winners, shooters and players who understand how to play the game, had already locked up Windler, who committed in July 2014. Though he could have waited on an offer from Indiana or Purdue in the spring of 2015, he went with the sure thing.

              Windler has never doubted his decision. In his time at Belmont, the Bruins were 94-34 despite having to play demanding non-conference schedules, finished first in the Ohio Valley Conference three times and second once, played in two NITs and then ended his career with a memorable NCAA Tournament trip.

              “I’ve learned so much about the game in general from coach Byrd,” Windler says. “Offensively, he’s boosted my game and given me the confidence to play the way I have. I have freedom, the green light to shoot. I’ve learned about games and situations, and to value possessions.”

              Windler has yet to sign with an agent, but he’s certain to be working out with another former Belmont star, Drew Hanlen, who has become an in-demand shot doctor and workout guru for aspiring NBA players. Windler has a list of skills he wants to polish before, he hopes, he’s extended a visit to the NBA’s Chicago Draft Combine.

              “I want to be more of a playmaker,” hey says. “I want to be able to finish over length. Adding to my vertical leap can always help. I’ll be working on gaining more weight and muscle. There’s always room for growth in that regard.”

              In a certain system, on a certain team, Windler could become a valuable piece, with his 3-point shooting range, ability to get to the rim, aggressive rebounding and defensive ability.

              Windler, who’s not the least bit cocky, sees a future in the league.

              “I think I can really be a good 3 and D guy,” Windler says. “A guy that can knock down shots and defend multiple positions.”

              * * *

              Chris Dortch is the editor of the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook. You can email him here, follow him on Twitter and listen to the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Hour.


              • #82
                You take Bol Bol if he is there doesn't matter if you have two centers, amazing potential.

                Would have been number 1 pick ten years ago.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


                • #83
                  Gotta go with the best available pick/future star potential.

                  Michael Porter Jr. was that for the Nuggets last draft. Even though he sat out the first year, he could pay big dividends as they need a star SF to compete for the title.


                  • #84
                    Windlers shooting percentage is nuts as far as efficiency and he is a lefty
                    Belmont OVC 32 1 18.4 1.5 3.1 .495 1.2 1.7 .717 0.3 1.4 .239 0.9 1.4 .667 1.3 3.3 4.5 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.0 2.2 4.3 -2.10
                    Belmont OVC 30 30 30.1 3.2 6.1 .533 2.0 3.0 .674 1.2 3.1 .398 1.5 2.0 .733 1.6 4.7 6.3 1.6 0.9 1.0 1.0 2.7 9.2 -1.69
                    Belmont OVC 33 33 35.4 6.2 11.1 .559 4.1 6.2 .665 2.1 4.9 .426 2.8 4.0 .718 1.7 7.6 9.3 2.7 1.0 0.9 2.4 2.6 17.3 -2.88
                    Belmont OVC 33 33 33.2 7.4 13.6 .540 4.3 6.6 .659 3.0 7.1 .429 3.5 4.2 .847 1.9 8.9 10.8 2.5 1.4 0.6 2.1 2.1 21.3 -2.60
                    Belmont 128 97 29.4 4.6 8.6 .541 2.9 4.4 .669 1.7 4.2 .406 2.2 2.9 .761 1.6 6.2 7.8 2.0 1.0 0.8 1.6 2.4 13.2 -2.32


                    • #85
                      With the 18th pick we are probably getting a borderline starter or good bench player. We have plenty of youth. Turner; Sabonis; Leaf; Holiday; Johnson and Sumner are all under contract and are all under the age of 25. Thatís 6 guys out of a maximum of 15 guys we can have under contract. Thatís a minimum of 40%.

                      For that reason I am looking to trade the pick. I donít want to trade just to trade, but if we can trade it for a usable player or package it to get a star caliber player then we should go for it without hesitation.


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by sav View Post
                        With the 18th pick we are probably getting a borderline starter or good bench player. We have plenty of youth. Turner; Sabonis; Leaf; Holiday; Johnson and Sumner are all under contract and are all under the age of 25. Thatís 6 guys out of a maximum of 15 guys we can have under contract. Thatís a minimum of 40%.

                        For that reason I am looking to trade the pick. I donít want to trade just to trade, but if we can trade it for a usable player or package it to get a star caliber player then we should go for it without hesitation.
                        Yes that is an option but do not be too short sighted. It depends on who you get(better be a star) because the Pacers traded away the 15th pick and two other players in 2011 for an average to slightly above average point guard who they let go because they did not want to pay him. Oh yeah that pick at 15 was Kawhi Leonard.


                        • #87
                          And if you think you like Cam Johnson you will like Dylan Windler better. Much better shooter and rebounds extremely well for a sg/sf. Take a look at the stats of the two.
                          Windler was double teamed a lot and is driven to get better


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by owl View Post

                            Yes that is an option but do not be too short sighted. It depends on who you get(better be a star) because the Pacers traded away the 15th pick and two other players in 2011 for an average to slightly above average point guard who they let go because they did not want to pay him. Oh yeah that pick at 15 was Kawhi Leonard.
                            Dont forget we traded Caris Levert who is showing All-Star potential in Brooklyn as well, not that Thad Young hasn't been amazing for us.


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by sav View Post
                              With the 18th pick we are probably getting a borderline starter or good bench player. We have plenty of youth. Turner; Sabonis; Leaf; Holiday; Johnson and Sumner are all under contract and are all under the age of 25. Thatís 6 guys out of a maximum of 15 guys we can have under contract. Thatís a minimum of 40%.

                              For that reason I am looking to trade the pick. I donít want to trade just to trade, but if we can trade it for a usable player or package it to get a star caliber player then we should go for it without hesitation.
                              This line of thinking is very outdated. If the scouts do their homework, they could easily draft an all-star at 18.
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by festar35 View Post

                                Dont forget we traded Caris Levert who is showing All-Star potential in Brooklyn as well, not that Thad Young hasn't been amazing for us.
                                That was definitely a win-win trade for both teams. Nothing screams bad trade about it. Unlike giving up 1 good player and 1 great player for a guy that was brought in to be a back-up PG.