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

Is it time for we as Pacers fans (myself in particular) to turn the corner and change how we view what is a good team?

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

    Well Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquio generated 417 million dollars for 1 single match. They took home 300 million between the two.

    It took Lebron Jamea a decade and 1000 basketball games to make that kind of loot.
    I think there's a huge difference between Mayweather's situation and LeBron's. The NBA generated 7.4 Billion...that's with a B...in 2017, for example. LeBron gets a tiny fraction of that. The point is, we are talking about the popularity of these sports. I don't think the NBA is more popular than NFL but it is way up there and I would argue there are more fans of basketball than combat sports. And if you are including wrestling, boxing, MMA, Judo, Karate, etc., in your basket I would say you have to consider the revenue generated by college basketball. Essentially, the game of basketball is more popular than any combat sport or them all combined.

    Edit: btw, NFL was at over 14 Billion in 2017...double the NBA in a tiny fraction of the games. I am sure worldwide that soccer draws the most fans of all but in the USA it is NFL.

    ...and interestingly LeBron made 86M in 2017 including his endorsements which are probably far higher than Manny and even Floyd's. So, LeBron isn't logging 1000 games to make 150M. Maybe salary but that's not the whole picture either.
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 05-29-2019, 11:23 PM.
    Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

      Yeah they are both way more popular than the NBA, whose ratings slipped this year.

      People are already growing tired of the Warriors who are the single driver of those ratings.

      I love this narrative that 90s basketball was "bully ball" and the suggestions that those players were less talented than todays players.

      But the reality is it takes far more skill to score on a man who is actually allowed to guard you.

      "Maybe put the Bulls in there" buddy the Bulls were the best defensive team of all time lol
      Basketball (and especially NBA) is the biggest sport in China, and growing in India. They don't need to care that much about tv ratings when people here pay for league pass and other apps that allow them (us) to watch replays. Wrestling and MMA aren't touching the NBA and never will.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

        Yes there are many. Just a few years back in 2016, Wrestlemania drew 102,000 people in Arlington Texas. 102k wouldn't show up in any city in America to watch the Warriors play the Raptors. No chance.

        My comparison is more about basketball vs combat sports as entertainment. And once you consider how many different promotions fall under that umbrella, worldwide, it's really not even close.

        Their aren't really any apples to apples comparisons because the NBA holds about 1500 events a year, but let's be real, people only care about around 50 of those games, and most dont draw a sellout crowd. The WWE or UFC only hold 200-300 a year combined. All sellouts, or near sellouts with large gates. Combat sports as a whole might reach 1500 events worldwide total. I would wager they typically ask a higher ticket price and sell a larger percentage of their tickets vs the NBA.

        My main point was that combat sports are truly global. Everyone likes to watch people fight. No matter where you are from. Basketball is semi global, it has a huge following worldwide for sure, but many cultures just dont dig it. I would guess that 90-95% of the NBAs popularity can be attributed to probably 5-6 countries.
        The NBA got over 108,000 fans to show up for an All-Star game. I think they could do the same for the Finals if that's the path they wanted to go. College basketball has decided to use large stadiums for their Final 4 and frequently fills 65-80k seat stadiums.

        The NBA had a revenue of over 8 billion last year. WWE reported 930 million. UFC also was less than a billion.

        Football has shown that you don't need to have tons of events in order to have massive revenues if you are popular enough. Television money is where it is at. The NBA gets 2.6 billion just for their national TV contract per year, which is 4 times as much in TV money as WWE gets for their entire schedule. And that only includes what the NBA gets in the US.

        Another comparison, March Madness gets the NCAA over a billion dollars in rights fees just to show 67 games. That's higher than the entire WWE or UFC revenues for the whole year, let alone their TV money!

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

          I think there's a huge difference between Mayweather's situation and LeBron's. The NBA generated 7.4 Billion...that's with a B...in 2017, for example. LeBron gets a tiny fraction of that. The point is, we are talking about the popularity of these sports. I don't think the NBA is more popular than NFL but it is way up there and I would argue there are more fans of basketball than combat sports. And if you are including wrestling, boxing, MMA, Judo, Karate, etc., in your basket I would say you have to consider the revenue generated by college basketball. Essentially, the game of basketball is more popular than any combat sport or them all combined.

          Edit: btw, NFL was at over 14 Billion in 2017...double the NBA in a tiny fraction of the games. I am sure worldwide that soccer draws the most fans of all but in the USA it is NFL.

          ...and interestingly LeBron made 86M in 2017 including his endorsements which are probably far higher than Manny and even Floyd's. So, LeBron isn't logging 1000 games to make 150M. Maybe salary but that's not the whole picture either.
          You answered your own question.....the NFL made 2x as much last year despite not being nearly as popular or global as the NBA......so money made is clearly not a good gauge as to how "popular" something is.

          I think we are just looking at this two different ways. Yes the NBA generates a lot of money, mainly because It holds a lot of events in the richest country to ever exist, much like the NFL. Most of the NBAs events make little money outside of TV, in most cities. But that number you throw out, contains a lot more money than just the tickets sold. That is all kinds of different revenue and isn't a sign of popularity as much as it's a sign of good marketing, and that has nothing to do with popularity.

          Tickets are also pretty cheap and always available. I can get a ticket to watch the Pacers cheaper and easier than I could get a ticket to see the last Avenger movie in 3d. I can go see a college game for pretty cheap too.There are a few countries that are fanatical about it for sure. But not as many as you'd think.

          NBA League pass only has about 2-3 million subscribers worldwide. It only costs 200 dollars to watch every single game the NBA has, every year. On the flip side, over 4 million people paid 100 dollars to watch Flloyd and Manny fight once, for just 36 minutes, and the house was packed. League pass is certainly a great deal by comparison, but its amount of subscribers dont tell me that basketball is more popular than fighting. It's absolutely not.

          Combat on the other hand, is actually the root of all sport, it is the oldest sport on earth. But its revenue is so fractured into a million different streams, it's impossible to see just how huge it is. If boxing wasn't so poorly managed and disorganized, it would be the biggest sport on earth, no doubt about it. It is a complete wreck and to this day can generate hundreds of million dollars in a single event out of thin air, like magic. Money ruined it as a sport, because there was so much money in it. It fetches a premium at the gate.

          And as far as UFC......How many completely new sports have come around in the last 30 years and hit it big besides the UFC? They are routinely selling close to/around a million PPV buys at like 75 bucks an event, so they are generating a **** lot of money. They dont pay the fighters squat compared to what they are worth and they havent unionized yet. And they are truly global and further along that path than the NBA is despite giving them a 40+ year head start. Why? Because of the universal nature of the sport and its expanded reach.

          Combat is so huge, it also pretty much infests all of our entertainment, outside of sports.

          Almost all of our movies are centered around violence of some sort. A battle between two forces in some form or fashion.

          Most of the popular TV shows contain violence and so do most of the popular video games.


          You also totally missed the point I was making about Lebron.......you forgot the fact that Floyd and Manny made that money in 36 minutes of competition. That's how huge the right fight can be. And Lebron couldn't play on PPV for 70 bucks a performance and make that kind of money because nobody would pay that kind of price to watch it. Why? Because it's not as intriguing, it's not as dramatic, it's not as in demand.
          Last edited by Taterhead; 05-30-2019, 10:50 AM.
          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

            The NBA got over 108,000 fans to show up for an All-Star game. I think they could do the same for the Finals if that's the path they wanted to go. College basketball has decided to use large stadiums for their Final 4 and frequently fills 65-80k seat stadiums.

            The NBA had a revenue of over 8 billion last year. WWE reported 930 million. UFC also was less than a billion.

            Football has shown that you don't need to have tons of events in order to have massive revenues if you are popular enough. Television money is where it is at. The NBA gets 2.6 billion just for their national TV contract per year, which is 4 times as much in TV money as WWE gets for their entire schedule. And that only includes what the NBA gets in the US.

            Another comparison, March Madness gets the NCAA over a billion dollars in rights fees just to show 67 games. That's higher than the entire WWE or UFC revenues for the whole year, let alone their TV money!
            What does revenue have to do with popularity?

            Is the NFL more popular than the NBA, worldwide? Not even close.

            But they generated more than the NBA and March Madness did combined. More than soccer worldwide. More than everything.

            Simply because it's the most popular sport in the richest country on earth and it is marketed masterfully.

            Money doesnt equal global polularity.
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Ichi View Post

              Basketball (and especially NBA) is the biggest sport in China, and growing in India. They don't need to care that much about tv ratings when people here pay for league pass and other apps that allow them (us) to watch replays. Wrestling and MMA aren't touching the NBA and never will.
              Yet they only sell 2 million league pass subscriptions every year.

              You are severely over estimating the leagues popularity worldwide.

              Again, we are talking about sports. Not leagues.
              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

              Comment


              • #67
                Rather than speculating on this, someone already performed the statistical analysis on global sports. The conclusion is that Taterhead is wrong.

                Soccer, as everyone should know, is easily the most popular sport worldwide. It is followed by basketball...tennis...cricket...Formula 1...Baseball...Olympics...American Football...and finally boxing which ranks at about 25% the popularity of basketball worldwide.

                The other combat sports add to that, but would never come close to basketball. /endofdebate

                http://www.biggestglobalsports.com/
                Source: World's Biggest Sports
                Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Somehow we have gotten off track here.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Somehow we have gotten off track here.
                    While Taterhead started the diversion on page 3, there is a linkage. I have to say I blame today's game for it. He started talking about combat sports because today's game is soft as a marshmallow and lacks in quality which led to this thread being started (IMO).
                    Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                      Yet they only sell 2 million league pass subscriptions every year.

                      You are severely over estimating the leagues popularity worldwide.

                      Again, we are talking about sports. Not leagues.
                      I live in China. The NBA might be bigger here than in the US. Young people blow up social media with NBA stuff. I'm not talking about direct league pass subscriptions, but there are several apps (like Tencent Sports) that work with the NBA and show you League Pass coverage. It isn't a direct LP subscription, but it's almost the same, with different tiers of "VIP" status. The only detriment is the start time for games on weekdays, as they begin when people are heading to work.

                      In addition to this, I've never been anywhere that has as many basketball courts as the average Chinese city. I grew up in Indy and frequented Chicago and NYC. It's crazy.

                      It is you that is severely under estimating the league's (and sport's) popularity worldwide.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        To post something relevant to the thread, as I missed Peck's (warning?) message before I went into a mini-rant...

                        I enjoy being a fan of the Pacers. I'm still young enough to admire the teams from the 90s on and have a sense of hope when I think about the future of the team, and have never seen years of middling basketball, with the exception of the Jim O Murphy years. I still went to the games though, and watched constantly on tv. The Pacers are the medium through which I watch basketball in general, so if they aren't winning championships it doesn't bother me that much. They are competitive and fight, and if not for some really lopsided teams (that I think we will never have in Indy) and an implosion or two, they could have been in the Finals 2 or 3 times more since 2000.

                        I am generally a realist, but still an optimistic one. I don't need a trophy for one year of validation after sitting through 5 or 6 seasons of garbage. That's how small market teams generally are winning championships, if they're lucky.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          I've been thinking about this for some time but honestly vnzla81 list of players he wanted to get to make the new roster really made me question what it is I know and love about Pacers basketball. Let me start this off by saying this. I hate the new NBA. I'm not joking, I hate it. I cannot stand the Pace & Space era that we are currently in. I mean I can appreciate the ball movement but beyond that I really hate the fact that someone pulling up for a 30' shot in a 3 on 1 fast break is considered okay. I can't stand that we not only accept but think that someone missing 64% of their shots is alright. I detest that the big man game has devolved into whether or not they can hit a three point shot. I mean we live in an era where a center can grab 15 rpg and block 2 shots a game but is considered unplayable because they can't hit three point shots.

                          But having said that, it doesn't matter what i think or want. It is what the NBA is today and will be for the foreseeable future.

                          With that in mind, is it time we stop building our franchise the way we do?

                          I'm sure it might go back further but it seems to have kicked into high gear when Larry Brown came here that we all bought heavily into the notion that defense wins games (not just championships) and we've had a pretty decent run of nearly 30 years building team after team with this in mind. We made one attempt at changing and it was a miserable failure (the Satan years). But was that because we still were not committing to the type of players we needed to play that way?

                          Is it time we stop focusing on getting defensive minded players that can on occasion score but instead actively work to become an offensive team that can defend when it has to? I'm not saying be crappy at defense but just adjust from being one of the top defensive teams in the NBA to one of the top offensive teams? Scoring droughts are not just a new phenomenon that happened in the 3rd periods for us this season. For years our teams have had trouble scoring and that is simply because we have over the years had quite a few dynamic defenders on our team but we have had very few dynamic scorers on our team.

                          Is it time to change that? I'm asking this because if there ever was a time where you could legitimately change a style of play it would be right now as over half of our roster is eligible to turn over. We could in theory bring in a whole new group, a group that are excellent passers, and shooter but maybe not the strongest defenders. Like I told him in the thread he posted, I really don't like the idea of bringing in a Mirotic, Rubio and keeping Bojan. But the reason I don't like it is I have been conditioned my entire life to believe that you had to have tough defenders and strong rebounders if you ever were going to do anything. But the times have changed and I am now wondering if maybe we as a team and fan base non't need to change with it.
                          I know exactly where you're coming from. I became a Pacers fan in the early 90's. Since then, I've been partial to building a basketball team with "specialist" at their relative positions. A Center has to anchor the defense and rebound. A PF has to have the quick first-step to the basket as well as be a post-up player. A SF has to be the team's best on-the-ball defender and a decent 3-pot shooter. A PG has to know how to run the offense and be a good ballhandler and distributor. A SG has to be your best shooter and scoring thread from long range, as well as, a good finisher at the rim. The Pacers have largely remained locked in this formula while many teams have begun to move away from it.

                          I'm still a fan of hard-nosed defense, but it's tough to see man-D as a winning strategy nowadays when the guy you have to defend isn't attacking the basket but instead is taking his shot 20-30 ft from the rim especially when the shooter is Steph Curry, James Harden, Klay Thompson or even LeBron James. How exactly do you defend that? Do you pressure the shooter in the half-court or just pray that he misses. For most teams, the latter is the better option.

                          I'm not opposed to sticking with finding the best players at the relative positions, but the Pacers have to find guys who are stronger, faster, more athletic (meaning more versatile) than they've ever been before because let's face it - our father's and grandfather's style of basketball has changed.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            The problem with building a team based on defense is that once the playoffs come, the refs can easily dictate the physicality of the game. Thus, forcing a team to adjust its defensive strategy. We saw that plenty of times when we had Big Roy down low. Lebron would just attack him and get the calls.

                            hell we even saw that last year against the Cavs in Game 5. Lebron scored 44 points with this shot chart. He knew we couldn’t touch him so he just drove it to the rim all game.

                            Click image for larger version

Name:	7F7FD5AE-33CC-4907-94A3-3FDFBAB1E0E8.jpeg
Views:	62
Size:	36.0 KB
ID:	3456274
                            Attached Files

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              And Tater, I pay £ 30 a month for Leaguepass that's about US$ 465 annually
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Kawhi is going to stay, Ainge is going to lose Kyrie while adding Davis for a year, Philly and Milwaukee will lose nobody and add vet depth,a Nets will add Kyrie and KD. Pacers will be the Pacers.

                                that's just the East. still stunned LeBron went West?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X