Tweet
Originally posted by Handoverfist
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
-
Nope, I miss read the question you are right no Okpala at draft. -
One day (24 hours) until the draft.Comment
-
-
Eh, I kinda get it, but I can't really judge him at all, certainly not on his HS career. I don't think it's fair to judge him on his one year in college either though since he was hurt. Which adds up to a wild card that can't shoot in my eyes.Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
Similarly I really want to know what Carsen's year would've been like if not for the sore back.Comment
-
My Top 2 realistic options (in no order and assuming Romeo is gone):
Nickeil Alexander-Walker
The cousin of Shai, this similar built guard was the leading scorer of the 2016 FIBA Americas Under-18 Championship with 17.4 points per game. He outscored the likes of Trae Young, Markelle Fultz, and Michael Porter Jr as well as Shai. He's a silky smooth combo guard standing at 6'6" with a 6'10" wingspan. His physical tools combined with above average instincts allowed him to boast a 19.9% defensive TO% meaning that a turnover occurred on 19.9% of Alexander-Walker's defensive possessions which led the 2019 NBA Draft class. Opponent's only scored on 28.5% of possessions when guarded by Nickeil. That number also leads this draft class.
Originally slotted as a shooting guard at Virginia Tech, Nickeil's versatility was unlocked after the team's point guard Justin Robinson went down due to injury last season forcing Nickeil to play primarily on the ball. He didn't disappoint by scoring 0.839 points per possession out of the pick and roll ranking in the 70th percentile in all of college basketball last season. He displays a penchant for passing by whipping cross court passes with ease to spot up shooters after breaking down the defense with a low to the floor crossover. If no one is open, he is more than capable of taking to the hole himself where he scores 52.4% and draws a shooting foul 8.7% of the time.
Although he was more than capable of being the primary ball handler, his strength comes in the ability to play off the ball and attack close outs or catch and shoot where he scored 1.261 PPP on 116 possessions as the off guard (ranking 82% of all college basketball players). He is noted as being ambidextrous and his drive patterns show it as he drives left 17.7% more often than he does driving right despite being a right handed shooter. He also draws a foul on an absurd 21.1% of drives left on spot up opportunities.
While his handle and court vision are above average for a player his size, he can be prone to turnovers when asked to shoulder too much of an offensive load. Despite this he averaged more takeaways on defense than giving up on offense so it didn't hurt his team too much as he gained back more possessions that he lost for the Hokies.
I see a great fit with the Pacers due to his off ball versatility combined with his ability to play on the ball and make the correct reads in pick and roll situations. His passing ability purely out of the pick and roll in the 2nd unit when paired with such players as McDermott, Holiday,and TJ Leaf will likely allow those player's offensive opportunities to increase and the overall efficiency of the team to improve. When potentially paired with Sabonis or Turner, his passing ability again is sure to help unlock the big men's potential WITHOUT sacrificing in other areas such as spot up opportunities which is the most efficient method of scoring in basketball.
For those that want to see his incredible defense in a game situation, refer to Duke vs Virginia Tech in tournament this year (https://youtu.be/9XDPaQ_5eug?t=4759) where he absolutely shuts down RJ Barrett after finally switching onto him with 6 minutes remaining in the game even blocking his dribble jumpshot attempt at the 1:19:19 mark of the referenced video. He scored only 9 points in this game but gathered 5 assists and provided lock down defense. He is probably the only guy capable of guarding 1-3 and actually being good at it. Realistically he's about 15 pounds away from being an every possession small forward with the height and length he has so if a team see's that as an advantage he can be molded into that later in his career. I do think he'll have an adjustment season shooting the three but his 77% FT% suggests he'll at least be a sufficient shooter. He's a guy who fits the mold of a championship level role player either as a starter or potential 6th or 7th man. His potential as a wing defender is what entices me. The overall ability of his game and defensive ability is what makes me favor him just slightly more than Herro.
Tyler Herro
I'll do a write up on Herro later. I think he's what the Pacers are looking more for too.Comment
-
I was more indicating that he can hit free throws at a better rate than was shown this past season by bringing up his high school %'s.Originally posted by ECKrueger View PostComment
-
Nice write up man. Interested in your take on Herro since he’s not really been high on my list due to his lack of athleticism and length. A lot of people are comparing his strengths and weaknesses to Devin Booker when he left Kentucky though so he has peaked my interest a bit.Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View PostLast edited by CJ Jones; 06-19-2019, 11:34 PM.Comment
-
Nicolas Claxton has been invited to the Green Room{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Ya, that makes sense. I just can't see Romeo as anything but a hyped up kid with potential. There's nothing solid to judge him on to me. I don't think any one would necessarily be clamoring for him if he weren't from Indiana.Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View PostComment
-
I think the Pacers will select a Guard, probably Nick Alexander-Walker if he's still on the board OR if they're able to trade up in the draft as rumor has it. The only other surprise would be if they selected a Center instead. For me, that pick would be Tacko Fall.Comment
-
Starting to worry have seen several mock drafts today with the Pacers taking Bol Bol, afraid he'll be even more injury prone than Greg Oden. Not in favor of that choice if it happensComment
-
I'm always leery of drafting rookies OR any player who sustained an injury before the draft. While Bol Bol's numbers look good, I don't think he has the majority nor the speed or athleticism to compete in today's fast-pace NBA. However, his foot-work, post-presence (rebounding and shot blocking), ability to knock down the 3-pt shot and his pedigree all make him a valuable target as a viable draft pick. He'd be second on my watch list for Centers. He'd have been first had he been a college senior, however, AND he wasn't injured (or coming off an injury just prior to the draft).Originally posted by diamonddave00 View PostComment
-
100% certain that Bol Bol report is a smokescreen.Comment
-
So I went and read up and watched video of who could be available at 18, assuming we stay at 18. A lot of the guys at that range I'm like "eh" on, but I wouldn't mind Keldon Johnson, Tyler Herro, or Bol Bol (unicorn potential). Luka Samanic is interesting but if we don't get rid of some bigs, he'd never see time.
But honestly the guy I like most at this spot who also fits a need is the one and only Romeo. Can't help but see a special player that was just hurt this year when I watch his highlights. He is so ridiculously smooth finishing at the rim. Really a lot about his game is smooth, he just moves differently than most guys, he looks like a star. The way he flips his hips and feet, his feel and touch with the ball, he's got a prototypical basketball physique, lanky, quick, long and smooth, but he's also not a small man, has the ability to take contact and finish. Might have the sweetest finger-roll I've seen in a decade. His shooting form looks really good to me, so I feel like his numbers dip was completely on the hand injury. He played through it, so he's tough. Shot 45% with a busted shooting hand. I feel like his draft stock just unnecessarily took a hit because of his hand injury and how IU used him, and I think he's going to really come in and make people think, "Why did we sleep on this guy?"
However, I also feel like some team ahead of us is also thinking the same thing and he will be gone. But man, special talent, top 10 if you ask me, shoulda been top 5. Shame how his stock dropped like it did. Think 18 would be a steal. Again, I don't think he'll be there. If he is, they're stupid not to grab him, especially if you consider how many seats he'll fill up at BLF.
Personally at 18 it's all a gamble or a steal anyway. I'd go big or go home, so Romeo or Bol Bol. If you can't get one of those guys, I'd probly try to package Sabo with the pick to grab rights to a higher guy or move in a new starter.Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 06-20-2019, 02:37 PM.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
-
Tyler Herro
Offensive ability: The kid is crafty. He utilizes jab steps and fakes to get his man off balance to drive or pull up or pass. Example: https://youtu.be/c8hWSQUChqo?t=1860 . He really uses on ball screens well as he leaves no room for the defender to squeeze through. This space allows him to pull up for a dribble jumper which he scored 0.991 PPP on last season which ranked in the 82nd percentile in all of Division I (also highest in this draft class) or whip it out to another shooter. It's worth noting that he didn't really get to show this a lot due to Hagans and Quickley commanding the ball most of the time. He ranked 99th percentile in transition as the ball handler showing his scoring ability by shooting 79.2% (eFG%) albeit on only 24 attempts. His transition TO% of 9.2% led the draft class.
He shot 93% from the free throw line and has a really compact release on his jumpshot and showing good mechanics with full arm extension despite only shooting 49.1% adjusted FG% on all jumpers. I don't believe this to be concerning however at the next level as he has an excellent base to work with moving forward. But as of now, he is best shooting off the dribble.
Weaknesses: He had a difficult time finishing over length at the rim only shooting 49% at the rim. But he did develop a solid runner which he shot 53.8% on 26 attempts.
Defensive Fundamentals and lateral quickness: Another moment from the UNC game that stood out to me was at the 33:08 mark ( https://youtu.be/c8hWSQUChqo?t=1987) when Reid Travis left his man open under the basket and Herro comes and accelerates over risking a poster to challenge Nassir Little at the rim. It didn't matter as Little finished over him but little things like that really can make a difference in games and I like to see it. His feet are always moving, literally. He bounces on the balls of his feet in anticipation of the opponent's next move and always has his head on a swivel with the right positioning to see his man and the ball. He can accelerate to rotations quickly and execute a good closeout with choppy steps so with a team the Pacers that emphasizes rotation patterns on defense I can see him doing well enough on that end.
His weakness on the defensive end is primarily getting through screens. He can get taken out of a play quite easily with a good screen whether on or off the ball. His defensive versatility is another concern. While he does possess above average agility for his size he can't cover quick point guards and he likely can't cover 3's with due to his shortened wingspan. His best place on defense is guarding the weakest offensive perimeter player on the floor at the time or a catch and shoot guard.
Fit with Indiana: He'd give the Pacers another shot creator that they need as his ability to create a shot for himself and others is one of the best in the class. I can see his defensive limitations being diminished or hidden well enough in the Pacers defensive system.Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 06-20-2019, 03:21 PM.Comment
Comment