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

Great Listen re: What's Happened

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Peck View Post

    No offense but Washington would laugh so hard on the other end of the phone that it could be felt in Indy.

    They could command a hell of a lot more than a deal that centers around an under performing center, a journeyman wing and a player who will not be in the NBA next season.
    None taken my friend.

    Maybe we sweeten the pot by either offering a future 1st and/or take on a bad contract of theirs
    Sittin on top of the world!

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      OK, just listened and J. Michael was a little vague on who Holiday and Brogdon were not happy with. I'm sure it isn't the 8th-12th guys on the roster. Vic hardly played this season. So that leaves, Myles, Domas, Warren. I don't know need to listen again.
      J said Holiday would stay if you’d asked him two months ago, and Vic has played in every game since then (but one). Whatever’s changed in Justin’s stance has been recent, so I wouldn’t dismiss Vic yet.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by imawhat View Post

        J said Holiday would stay if you’d asked him two months ago, and Vic has played in every game since then (but one). Whatever’s changed in Justin’s stance has been recent, so I wouldn’t dismiss Vic yet.
        JHoliday also said JMichael's statement was false.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post

          JHoliday also said JMichael's statement was false.
          It may be, but he could also easily be doing damage control. What else is he supposed to say on Twitter, to be fair? A lot easier to discredit a beat writer than have to answer questions honestly about that sort of thing. My guess is the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think J Michael definitely heard some things, but they may have also been somewhat exaggerated to begin with.

          Comment


          • #80
            I haven't posted in forever, and I was thinking about trying to find a thread on this and I guess this one works, but the Pacers build some of these problems themselves.

            They fall in love with the idea of all their core players. If you look throughout the NBA post Jordan, very few teams are developed with a core that is all the same age and turn out wonderfully. Pieces need to be shifted moves have to be made. Outside of the Warriors ( and Spurs), I really can't think of another team that drafted most of their core or acquired them in a development segment of their careers and had huge ongoing success and won titles. The power struggle becomes too much and even the two examples I have of GSW and SAS have huge dominant MVPs in Curry or Duncan. The Thunder could not make it work with Westbrook and Durant. I think chemistry is overrated, but power structure is not, teams need a leader. This is why Kawhi going to Toronto worked, Kyle Lowry is their leader, there was no question.

            Pacers have invited a situation like this for literally 3 years by not choosing between Sabonis and Turner. Not only was it a wonky fit considering the current direction of the NBA, it was a wonky fit when it comes to player personalities. Two guys essentially the same age, playing essentially the same position, who were both lottery picks.... there was no way this was going to work from a personality stand point, especially since Turner was here first. This is why so many of us said the Pacers needed to make the Turner/Sabonis experiment as soon as Oladipo went down and trade Thad and then make the decision of which one to keep based off that experiment. They didn't. Told themselves a lie it could work and IMO created a situation in the locker room that was doomed to fail. Expecting Turner or Sabonis to adjust to that is as silly as letting kids go back to college during a pandemic and act surprised when they throw parties....

            Secondly the acquistion of Brogdon when you already have an injured Oladipo. This is another tricky situation because of Brogdon's reputation as a strong leader. It's no shock that he came in and took over the locker room, especially since Oladipo's leadership style was essentially just "I'm around a bunch and I'm a really upbeat guy!" Now I think you still could have made this work, but it definitely wasn't happening with Nate McMillan as the head coach.

            My point being, maybe the Pacers are finally learning you can't marry yourself to players just because you drafted them and you like them and they are nice people.

            I don't know what will happen this offseason, maybe you can save the Brogdon/Oladipo dynamic, but I'm doubtful. You defintiely cannnot save the Turner/Sabonis dynamic IMO unless you hire D'Antoni and he lets Myles shoot like 10 3's a game.

            Sometimes managing individual personalities is as simple as deciding you're not going to manage them and that you have to both move on, but the Pacers have to stop telling themselves this lie that just because a core's locker room dynamic starts well it's going to stay that way forever. The locker room was so good Oladipo's first year and it was so good up until Oladipo's injury that the Pacers just buy into this idea that it will always be good and you end up with silly stories like Thad Young being allowed to go in and make personnel decisions at the trade deadline to keep a roster together. Silly, silly ****. Is Thad Young still with the franchise now dealing with all these dynamics? Of course not.

            Frankly they made the same mistake with the PG/Lance/West/Hibbert teams and instead of addressing it when it cracks start to appear, they wait til they have a full blown collapse on their hands. I think the same thing has essentially happened here.


            Comment


            • #81
              Good post. Good to see you back here.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                I haven't posted in forever, and I was thinking about trying to find a thread on this and I guess this one works, but the Pacers build some of these problems themselves.

                They fall in love with the idea of all their core players. If you look throughout the NBA post Jordan, very few teams are developed with a core that is all the same age and turn out wonderfully. Pieces need to be shifted moves have to be made. Outside of the Warriors ( and Spurs), I really can't think of another team that drafted most of their core or acquired them in a development segment of their careers and had huge ongoing success and won titles. The power struggle becomes too much and even the two examples I have of GSW and SAS have huge dominant MVPs in Curry or Duncan. The Thunder could not make it work with Westbrook and Durant. I think chemistry is overrated, but power structure is not, teams need a leader. This is why Kawhi going to Toronto worked, Kyle Lowry is their leader, there was no question.

                Pacers have invited a situation like this for literally 3 years by not choosing between Sabonis and Turner. Not only was it a wonky fit considering the current direction of the NBA, it was a wonky fit when it comes to player personalities. Two guys essentially the same age, playing essentially the same position, who were both lottery picks.... there was no way this was going to work from a personality stand point, especially since Turner was here first. This is why so many of us said the Pacers needed to make the Turner/Sabonis experiment as soon as Oladipo went down and trade Thad and then make the decision of which one to keep based off that experiment. They didn't. Told themselves a lie it could work and IMO created a situation in the locker room that was doomed to fail. Expecting Turner or Sabonis to adjust to that is as silly as letting kids go back to college during a pandemic and act surprised when they throw parties....

                Secondly the acquistion of Brogdon when you already have an injured Oladipo. This is another tricky situation because of Brogdon's reputation as a strong leader. It's no shock that he came in and took over the locker room, especially since Oladipo's leadership style was essentially just "I'm around a bunch and I'm a really upbeat guy!" Now I think you still could have made this work, but it definitely wasn't happening with Nate McMillan as the head coach.

                My point being, maybe the Pacers are finally learning you can't marry yourself to players just because you drafted them and you like them and they are nice people.

                I don't know what will happen this offseason, maybe you can save the Brogdon/Oladipo dynamic, but I'm doubtful. You defintiely cannnot save the Turner/Sabonis dynamic IMO unless you hire D'Antoni and he lets Myles shoot like 10 3's a game.

                Sometimes managing individual personalities is as simple as deciding you're not going to manage them and that you have to both move on, but the Pacers have to stop telling themselves this lie that just because a core's locker room dynamic starts well it's going to stay that way forever. The locker room was so good Oladipo's first year and it was so good up until Oladipo's injury that the Pacers just buy into this idea that it will always be good and you end up with silly stories like Thad Young being allowed to go in and make personnel decisions at the trade deadline to keep a roster together. Silly, silly ****. Is Thad Young still with the franchise now dealing with all these dynamics? Of course not.

                Frankly they made the same mistake with the PG/Lance/West/Hibbert teams and instead of addressing it when it cracks start to appear, they wait til they have a full blown collapse on their hands. I think the same thing has essentially happened here.
                The shadow of Donnie Walsh looms large over this organization.

                I don't mean that in a totally derogatory way, some sure but I also acknowledge how he is a stabilizing force and some of his core beliefs are based on logic.

                But building a core over the years even at the expense of getting a potentially better player comes directly from the book of Walsh, chapter 1.

                The arguments are there for both sides to use. Over the past 30 years the Indiana Pacers have been a successful franchise in that they don't lose a lot, always win home games more than they lose, typically make the playoffs and have advanced to the finals once and the E.C. finals several times. All while never tanking, never having a "franchise" or "all-NBA" player.

                On the other hand the team often times has skirted around the .500% mark, more often than not loses in the first round, only 2-3 times in 30 years has actually been considered a threat to win a title, has never won a title, because they always are either good or mediocre draft middling players who typically get good bang for their buck but rarely ever become all-star players let alone star players.

                Basically we are always the little engine that could. That is why I was shocked when they fired Nate.

                That being said, yes the Thad Young story about asking for no changes was about as irritating a story as you can get.

                With Pritchard I can't get a read on whether or not he actually grew up around here so he believes some of this crap that he spews or if that is what he thinks his fan base is. The whole three T's, and how his favorite moments were seeing the faces on the bench stuff. Giving us the whole tough talk speech about Tyreke Evans only to find out that basically they had no control over him at all.

                Basically I just wasted a lot of time to say that what you said is absolutely correct, I guess I just felt the need to throw a shot at Walsh as well.


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

                Comment


                • #83
                  Pacers got a thing for falling in love with the wrong players
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    I haven't posted in forever, and I was thinking about trying to find a thread on this and I guess this one works, but the Pacers build some of these problems themselves.

                    They fall in love with the idea of all their core players. If you look throughout the NBA post Jordan, very few teams are developed with a core that is all the same age and turn out wonderfully. Pieces need to be shifted moves have to be made. Outside of the Warriors ( and Spurs), I really can't think of another team that drafted most of their core or acquired them in a development segment of their careers and had huge ongoing success and won titles. The power struggle becomes too much and even the two examples I have of GSW and SAS have huge dominant MVPs in Curry or Duncan. The Thunder could not make it work with Westbrook and Durant. I think chemistry is overrated, but power structure is not, teams need a leader. This is why Kawhi going to Toronto worked, Kyle Lowry is their leader, there was no question.

                    Pacers have invited a situation like this for literally 3 years by not choosing between Sabonis and Turner. Not only was it a wonky fit considering the current direction of the NBA, it was a wonky fit when it comes to player personalities. Two guys essentially the same age, playing essentially the same position, who were both lottery picks.... there was no way this was going to work from a personality stand point, especially since Turner was here first. This is why so many of us said the Pacers needed to make the Turner/Sabonis experiment as soon as Oladipo went down and trade Thad and then make the decision of which one to keep based off that experiment. They didn't. Told themselves a lie it could work and IMO created a situation in the locker room that was doomed to fail. Expecting Turner or Sabonis to adjust to that is as silly as letting kids go back to college during a pandemic and act surprised when they throw parties....

                    Secondly the acquistion of Brogdon when you already have an injured Oladipo. This is another tricky situation because of Brogdon's reputation as a strong leader. It's no shock that he came in and took over the locker room, especially since Oladipo's leadership style was essentially just "I'm around a bunch and I'm a really upbeat guy!" Now I think you still could have made this work, but it definitely wasn't happening with Nate McMillan as the head coach.

                    My point being, maybe the Pacers are finally learning you can't marry yourself to players just because you drafted them and you like them and they are nice people.

                    I don't know what will happen this offseason, maybe you can save the Brogdon/Oladipo dynamic, but I'm doubtful. You defintiely cannnot save the Turner/Sabonis dynamic IMO unless you hire D'Antoni and he lets Myles shoot like 10 3's a game.

                    Sometimes managing individual personalities is as simple as deciding you're not going to manage them and that you have to both move on, but the Pacers have to stop telling themselves this lie that just because a core's locker room dynamic starts well it's going to stay that way forever. The locker room was so good Oladipo's first year and it was so good up until Oladipo's injury that the Pacers just buy into this idea that it will always be good and you end up with silly stories like Thad Young being allowed to go in and make personnel decisions at the trade deadline to keep a roster together. Silly, silly ****. Is Thad Young still with the franchise now dealing with all these dynamics? Of course not.

                    Frankly they made the same mistake with the PG/Lance/West/Hibbert teams and instead of addressing it when it cracks start to appear, they wait til they have a full blown collapse on their hands. I think the same thing has essentially happened here.
                    I can overlook the Brogdon/Dipo issue. That was difficult to predict. I can't forgive the Turner/Sabonis problem. That is simply incompetence.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Pacers got a thing for falling in love with the wrong players
                      Say no more....this right here

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        I blame everything on Goga! He clearly is the culprit here
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          It just seems like the pacers are trying to do the exact opposite of what every other teams are doing. More teams are drafting, signing and using versatile wings that can defend 1-4. The pacers are drafting TJ leaf and Goga. Goga still may be a good center but,
                          he’s not versatile. I do think he will be a solid player but we had guys like Nasir little and thybulle available. IMO these are the type of players that this team is missing.

                          i agree with trader joe about Myles. For some reason, which I don’t know why we became married to him. I feel like after a few years we should have identified what type of player Myles was. If we did that we wouldn’t have been paying him 20 million a year. I remember when the sixers traded Michael Carter Williams I was puzzled. Why would the sixers trade a first round pic after a rookie of the year season. I think it’s because they realized after that year his value would not be any higher, and he had major holes in his game. If the pacers would have realized the same about Myles we could have received a nice return for him. I’m still hopeful that a new coach can put Myles in a better position to succeed but if not then we made a major mistake by holding onto him this long

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by LilSean320 View Post
                            It just seems like the pacers are trying to do the exact opposite of what every other teams are doing. More teams are drafting, signing and using versatile wings that can defend 1-4. The pacers are drafting TJ leaf and Goga. Goga still may be a good center but,
                            he’s not versatile. I do think he will be a solid player but we had guys like Nasir little and thybulle available. IMO these are the type of players that this team is missing.

                            i agree with trader joe about Myles. For some reason, which I don’t know why we became married to him. I feel like after a few years we should have identified what type of player Myles was. If we did that we wouldn’t have been paying him 20 million a year. I remember when the sixers traded Michael Carter Williams I was puzzled. Why would the sixers trade a first round pic after a rookie of the year season. I think it’s because they realized after that year his value would not be any higher, and he had major holes in his game. If the pacers would have realized the same about Myles we could have received a nice return for him. I’m still hopeful that a new coach can put Myles in a better position to succeed but if not then we made a major mistake by holding onto him this long
                            I don’t think people outside view Myles Turner the same way we do. His contract isn’t that bad and he’s still only 23 years old. He has been a starter for 4 seasons and has 1 elite skill - Rim Protection. He’s an above average 3 point shooter for a center. He doesn’t score a lot consistently but he also doesn’t take very many shots or play a lot of minutes (he only averaged more than 30 minutes a game once and that was his second and best season). If we didn’t have Sabonis and had to rely on him to play 34-36 minutes a night, he would probably be a 16 points, 8 rebounds, 2.5 blocks a game player.

                            Those are the selling points they can use to trade him for another young wing player and/or late lottery draft pick.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Pacers got a thing for falling in love with the wrong players
                              Terrible at drafting players, and make too many whole sale player changes year after year.

                              List of terribles from the KP Era so far.

                              1. Letting Lance go in favor of Tyreke Evans. That years team lack juice compared to the team who took the Cavs to 7 the year before even though it was the same starting 5.
                              2. Drafting Niang and then letting him go after one season.
                              3. Not extending Bogey after his first year. They should have locked him up for 4 years. He took his game to another level with the Pacers and was even better with Jazz this year.
                              4. Not forcing the Twin towers experiment the 2nd half of the the 2019 season after Dipo went down.
                              5. Not trading Thad Young at the deadline in the 2019 season.
                              6. Not firing Nate after year 2, when it w was clear he had no interesting in developing young players and was content to let Thad Young fire off corner 3's.


                              Now I will say adding both Lamb and Warren on cheap contacts and getting Brodgon has negated most of these blunders from previous years.
                              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by graphic-er View Post

                                Terrible at drafting players, and make too many whole sale player changes year after year.

                                List of terribles from the KP Era so far.

                                1. Letting Lance go in favor of Tyreke Evans. That years team lack juice compared to the team who took the Cavs to 7 the year before even though it was the same starting 5.
                                2. Drafting Niang and then letting him go after one season.
                                3. Not extending Bogey after his first year. They should have locked him up for 4 years. He took his game to another level with the Pacers and was even better with Jazz this year.
                                4. Not forcing the Twin towers experiment the 2nd half of the the 2019 season after Dipo went down.
                                5. Not trading Thad Young at the deadline in the 2019 season.
                                6. Not firing Nate after year 2, when it w was clear he had no interesting in developing young players and was content to let Thad Young fire off corner 3's.


                                Now I will say adding both Lamb and Warren on cheap contacts and getting Brodgon has negated most of these blunders from previous years.
                                Well said!
                                Sittin on top of the world!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X