Fwiw, I wanted to keep Bojan. But we have Lamb and Warren making just a tad more than what he makes combined and are younger and together will produce more.
if we are talking McDermott and Lamb making Bojans salary then that is a legit gripe. But i am talking myself into Jeremy Lamb as a long sixth man. I think he might have some untapped potential.
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
-
I have been following the NBA for 40 years, and last night will go down as the most memorable night in the history of the NBA. It was crazy to watch it all.
According to a Jazz article in the Athletic, Bojanb was the Jazz second choice as they had a deal to sign Nikola Mirotic, until he went overseasLeave a comment:
-
I loved yesterday's moves, not counting losing Bogey. Warren plus McDermott is a higher salary than Bogey, so that stings a little.
In general, we better hope there is significant improvement from one of Brogdon, Sabonis or Myles. They are all very solid third players on a great team, but we need a second player still (or another first like Vic).
Thad really grew on me, but I'm just as excited that we've removed Nate's security blanket. He has to play Myles/Domas together now, and that will be a very good thing.Last edited by imawhat; 07-01-2019, 08:23 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Oh and for the record Cory Joseph to the kings.
Chris HaynesVerified account @ChrisBHaynes 2h2 hours ago
More
Free agent guard Cory Joseph has agreed to a three-year, $37 million deal with the Sacramento Kings, league sources tell Yahoo Sports.
Last edited by Peck; 07-01-2019, 04:52 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Vic is our vet. all these dudes are good solid pros. no need for anybody to show them the ropes. shouldn't be anyway. Myles is the true cornerstone, close as we have anyway, and is in his 2nd deal now. don't care if he's 23 he's the face of the franchise and is well versed in pro basketball. if he's the face make him the face, if a guy is is 29 and doesn't want to listen because Myles is chronologicaly young that player is likely dumb.
they're young vets with extremely varied paths of getting to Indy. if they buck back on the clear cornerstones of Vic and Myles it's not gonna work.Leave a comment:
-
I look at the roster as it stands now and realize that we are at 12 Players:
Brogdon / Holiday
Dipo ( out ) / Lamb / Sumner
Warren / McDermott / Alize
Sabonis / Leaf
Myles / Goga
The Pacers don't technically have to do anything at this point. But I go over the Salary Cap #s and see that the Pacers have roughly $5 mil in remaining Cap space ( not sure how much Sumner's extension will takeaway from this ) while still having the Room MLE at $4.7 mil.
Listening to KPs interview with Dakich a week back, I have some thoughts as to what will happen given what we know now:
1 ) KP mentions possibly look at another backup PF.
I don't know if that would change given that we went in a different direction by losing out on Bojan ( which I think was a Plan A ). As many have mentioned, a Sabonis/Myles frontcourt may work for some lineups. But clearly it won't work against others. Unless we go total small ball and run Warren and Alize in the PF spot, I am wondering if KP is looking for a Small ball PF that can do what Thad did for us when we had to run smaller than normal. You have to wonder if the rumor that the Pacers were looking at Aminu was an attempt to fill the frontcourt defensive void that Thad leaves behind.
2 ) If history tells us anything, it's that KP has always gone into the season with at least 5 frontcourt Players and 5 options at the Guard spot.
Last year, the frontcourt rotation was Thad/Myles/Sabonis/KOQ/Leaf. The Backcourt rotation wasDC/Dipo/CoJo/Holiday/Sumner. At the start of the upcoming season, you have to wonder if KP will do the same. We can still add an "end of the bench" Backcourt and Frontcourt Player to get to 14 with the remaining $5 mil.
3 ) I'm gonna be honest with you, I want to let Sumner, Alize and Leaf "sink or swim" while giving Goga the chance to play as well
This means not adding anyone else and therefore giving Nate a "safety blanket" Player to get in their way. If there is anytime where we have the chance to develop anyone, it's now with Dipo out for the first half of the season. Especially with Leaf, his Team option comes up in the 2020-2021 season. I really hope that he can fill the backup PF role, but honestly....I have no clue how he will do when given consistent and meaningful minutes.
4 ) With Thad gone, this lineup is really young. Lamb, McDermott and Dipo are literally the oldest Players on the Team ( all 27 years old ).
Unfortunately, you really wonder if KP is going to add someone to not only fill the frontcourt void that Thad left behind but also his veteran leadership that we will now be sorely missed ( Which goes against my above point ).
Thoughts?
Last edited by CableKC; 07-01-2019, 04:25 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Brogdon was an RFA that we just outbid a contender for. so let's end that meme.Leave a comment:
-
We've completely turned over the roster. (well, not completely). Go look at the roster on Pacers.com. 6 of 15 are gone. Plus Bowen replacing Reed. Only 3 replacing those 6. And I'm fine with that, the team is better now.
Brogdon was high on my point guard list even if he isn't very assisty. I didn't think we'd be able to get him since he was restricted. I'm thrilled.
Will we add a player now or wait to see what shakes out? I looked around at the free agents that are left. I wouldn't mind taking a look at Stanley Johnson on a minimum contract. We could use a tough defender off the bench. I know he hasn't panned out on offense but surely his defense is good.
I can't wait for summer league. We'll see our second string C and PG playing together. And Sumner and Alize can show their stuff. Those 4 could all contribute this year.
Lastly, there's this tweet from Pitchard. Yeah, maybe he's just being nice. Or maybe that Frank Vogel team really had issues. And maybe Nate and Thad turned things around.
Leave a comment:
-
Well Peck, as someone who shares your enthusiasm, I just think you're wrong about one thing.....they will be much better defensively than they have been, despite losing Thad IMO.
Yes, they will miss the defensive versatility Thad Young brought to the team, for certain. However, they are so much better athletically now on the wings, its ridiculous. And, Dan Burke is pretty good at teaching people to play good sound, team defense. If you give him the guys with the tools, he will deliver a great unit, I am 100% confident of that. Brogdon allows us to do more effective switching out top, which will allow our bigs to stay at home more, where they are at their best. We have another rim protector with size in Bitadze, who I actually like a lot. I dont think Bogie was a defensive asset really, just someone who played hard and had his moments. Lamb, Warren and Brogdon will be upgrades over Collison, Bogie and Thad, on defense more than anywhere else. And that's just my opinion, but to me, that's a much stronger chain, because there is no weak.link like Darren Collison. His lack of size killed us in the playoffs.
In this new NBA, you need multiple guys 6'5"-6'8" who can defend the entire court. And we have enough of those guys now.
these moves say to me, that KP think Sabonis and Turner will play better together if they can do more effective switching defensively, and I agree. Now, we should be able to do that.
If we can get a healthy lineup out there of
Brogdon
Oladipo
Warren
Sabonis
Turner
We will have 5 guys who have the ability to play both ends of the court, with no glaring weak link on either end. We also have really good outside shooting, on paper. We should rebound very well, on paper. Between Brogdon, Holiday and eventually Oladipo, we should have excellent guard play. We seem to have plenty of size, speed, quickness, athleticism, shooting, playmaking, defending, toughness and character. Depth is a question mark, with some intrigue and new faces there. But we definitely have more potential than we did before all this.
We also have some young guys the arrow is pointing up on.
Can Leaf be a player for us?
Is Aaron Holiday as good as he looks sometimes?
What's up with this Brian Bowen kid they signed? He certainly has some talent and might be a steal.
Is Goga Bitadze another talented center from overseas, or just another guy?
Can they put together a bench?
Are they too young now?
We will see, but it's certainly more interesting to me now.Last edited by Taterhead; 07-01-2019, 03:34 AM.Leave a comment:
-
I love the offseason so far and was holding out hope KP would try to extend the team's window of potential success, and that is exactly what he did. We are a young team that can go hoop. Wish Thad was still here because of our current group could use a tough leader in the frontcourt... But Malcom is a tough dude, as has already been noted.
Did Rondae sign anything yet? Or rumors about him? If we could pull him on a 3/4 year deal, I would be elated.Leave a comment:
-
Though I liked Bogie, but when defenses were concentrated on him he was a non-factor. This new team is going to be fun. We will have better understanding with ~20 games into the regular season. Personally, I like the new mold. Healthy Dipo, improving Turner, menacing Domas plus all the new additions (I like that Brogdon, he is much taller, longer and younger than DC), plus loaded bench - looks like one of the best teams in the East. Raptors? They got very lucky with their championship run, but it looks like one and done. KL, Gasol, Ibaka - age is their enemy. Philly is OK, but Pacers match up well against them.Who else? Bucks? Sorry Giannis, you need to learn to shoot basketball, juicing up will not help you in that department.
West will be a bloodbath again. East? Why not Pacers?Leave a comment:
-
Our backcourt, once/if/when Vic is fully healthy and recovered, should be as good as anyone in the East, if not better, I agree. Our 5 position moving forward, between the three young big men that we have, should be right up there as well. The question will really boil down to whether or not we are close or competitive at the 3 and 4 positions, which I think are big question marks as of now. Hoping for the best!Originally posted by Peck View PostLeave a comment:
-
The more I think about it, what back courts in the East are going to be better than Oladipo and Brogdon in the near future? Irving and Levert? Maybe. Walker and Smart? I don't see it. Who else?
EDIT: Dammit now I've gone and talked myself into being excited for the future. Ugh....Leave a comment:
-
I agree we will miss Thad's defensive grit and leadership, but I think Brodgon will bring both of that to the point position in a way we haven't seen since Mark Jackson. Certainly worried about how we will stop the many star forwards in the league, but maybe we make some more moves.Leave a comment:
-
One thing that I haven't seen discussed much is the prospect of team chemistry next year. We've had such an amazing culture here (which I know some would say is overrated in the NBA) and losing Thad (especially), DC, CoJo, and even Bogie to an extent really removes a large part of that equation as well as their veteran leadership. I know Vic is, by all accounts, a big part of that as well, but he will still be out for a while. Probably fair to say that Domas and Myles are important contributors to the chemistry as well. Will just certainly be a different dynamic in that locker room and on the court next year.Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: