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

GET BEN SIMMONS PRITCHARD !!!!

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

  • xIndyFan
    replied
    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
    [FONT=Calibri] . . . I don’t have time to look it up right now but would be interesting to see what Turner’s shooting %’s looked like last year if you take out his terrible start in November & early December. In the end I think things will even out and he will end up shooting in the 35-36% range on 4-5 attempts per game
    If you take out November and December, Myles shot 34.6% for the season. Since we are looking at both, Domas shot 31.1% over the same period. FYI, Domas shot 53.8% in Nov/Dec and Myles shot 18.2% during that same time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Downtown Bang!
    replied
    Turner's 3-Point shooting from 2017 thru 2019 was 37.4%. The last two years it has fallen to 33.99%. One reason is volume. He shot 2.5 per game in in 2018 & 2019 vs 4.2 per game the last two years. A bigger reason is where he now has to be on the floor in the offense. In his better two seasons he took 71% of his 3-point attempts from the top of the arc and between the top of the arc and the right wing where he shot 38.3%. In the last two seasons the volume of attempts in that area fallen to 53% and he is now taking more 3-point attempts from the far wing on both sides and into the corner where in the past he has shot around 31%.

    Myles always got a little too much credit from fans early in his career as a shooter but now the perception is going way to far the other direction. If you don't think Turner spaces the floor you don't know basketball or have the weird "I can't support Domas without tearing down Turner” thing going on that way too many Pacer fans revel in...


    Another thing Turner gets way too little credit from fans for is his willingness to be a role player on offense and sacrifice shots that were important to him in the past. In 2017 thru 2019 he took 359 shots from the top of the key, foul line and foul line extended area and knocked those down at a 45% clip which is 5% percentage points above the league average. The last two years he has only taken 49 shots from those same areas on the court. Unless RC makes some changes in how Myles is involved in the offensive sets he is really out there on offense to shoot threes & look for opportunities to make cuts or dribble drives for paint attempts. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing as long as he continues to bring it on defense.

    I don’t have time to look it up right now but would be interesting to see what Turner’s shooting %’s looked like last year if you take out his terrible start in November & early December. In the future I think things will even out and he will end up shooting in the 35-36% range on 4-5 attempts per game
    Last edited by Downtown Bang!; 07-07-2021, 10:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ichi
    replied
    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
    OK - talking about 3pt percentages ....... I don't get how people call a 33% shooter 'poor' and gloat over a 38% shooter. (just random numbers ......)

    That's a 5% difference. Let's say both are taking 5 3s a game. That's 20 games to take 100 of them. To shoot 5% better, that simply means that Player A hit 5 more over 20 games. 1 more every 4 games or so.

    I just don't see that as the end-all of 3PT shooting. What am I missing ??
    For one player, it's not a huge deal, but when looking at the team overall, it's a big deal for sure. For example, Pacers averaged (right in the middle of league, 16th) 34.1 3pt shots per game this season. If the team hits 38% (which would be 6th in the league for a team %), they would hit a miniscule sliver under 13 3s per game. If they hit 33% of them, it takes them down to a bit over 11 per game. That's 5-6 points more per game the team would have, and if they were better shooters, we'd logically assume they'd probably take a couple more even. For the record, we hit 36.5% as a team, so Myles being as good as someone like McDermott could make a pretty big dent in that total output difference between us and the top tier shooting teams in the league.

    Not that one player change would make all the difference, of course, but it would be a big step toward helping the team out. Now, because most centers are certainly worse shooters than Myles, Myles does have respect from opposing defense, and therefore does kinda spread the court, which already opens more up for others theoretically. If he could knock down more (he did deal with a wrist/hand injury for a bit), it may be able to make a big difference in the offense. I think he could, personally, but it remains to be seen if he'll ever take that next step as a big man shooter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
    I'd also submit that when it comes to players like Harden or Luka, even if they don't shoot especially well from range, they already have an inherent gravity that'll follow them wherever they go on the court. I mean, why would your attention ever NOT be on Harden?
    Agreed. But the point I was making is that they do shoot well from range, given their volume and shot type, and that this creates extra gravity.


    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
    Now, take a player who scores 12ppg, put him in the lineup next to a center who scores over 20ppg and operates only out of the low post, who do you think defenders are paying more attention to? The "gravity" a player generates comes from a number of things, not the least of which is, is that guy the teams 5th scoring option lol. See exhibit E, or you know, just kind of ignore him. It's gonna take a lot better shooting than what he brings in order to pull players away from the paint, where your best player does all his work.
    The fact is, though, that opponents do not ignore Myles. They do pay attention to him and that creates more space for Domas inside to operate. If we had a non-shooter out there next to Domas like, let's say Capela, our spacing would be a lot worse and Domas' job would be much tougher.

    And, yes, Domas generates more gravity than Myles. That's a given. Domas is a much, much better offensive player after all so that's natural. But what you want next to Domas is a big that is capable of knocking out outside shots. Oshae did a very good job at it when Myles went down which is why Domas/Oshae worked just as well. What you cannot have next to Domas is a non-shooter. That will only hurt his production and our spacing.

    Leave a comment:


  • OneMoreYear
    replied
    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

    Oh, absolutely. Players who create their own 3s usually get contested shots. They very rarely get spot-up opportunities since they are the ones that usually have the ball.
    I'd also submit that when it comes to players like Harden or Luka, even if they don't shoot especially well from range, they already have an inherent gravity that'll follow them wherever they go on the court. I mean, why would your attention ever NOT be on Harden?

    Now, take a player who scores 12ppg, put him in the lineup next to a center who scores over 20ppg and operates only out of the low post, who do you think defenders are paying more attention to? The "gravity" a player generates comes from a number of things, not the least of which is, is that guy the teams 5th scoring option lol. See exhibit E, or you know, just kind of ignore him. It's gonna take a lot better shooting than what he brings in order to pull players away from the paint, where your best player does all his work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

    Players like Luka and Harden almost never get open 3s tho.
    Oh, absolutely. Players who create their own 3s usually get contested shots. They very rarely get spot-up opportunities since they are the ones that usually have the ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taterhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

    That looks like nothing but hairsplitting to me. You could make that exact argument for most well-known stretch 5s. Brook Lopez (Milwaukee Brook Lopez, not Brooklyn Brook Lopez), Marc Gasol (late-era Gasol), Al Horford (Boston-era Horford), Kristaps Porzingis (Mavericks-era) et cetera. They were all used primarily as stretch players and not as primary post threats.



    Domas is a 32.1% career shooter from 3 on 1.3 attempts per game.

    Myles is a 35.2% career shooter from 3 on 2.4 attempts per game.

    The difference between the two is significant. Both in percentage and volume. A 3.1 difference in percentage is nothing to scoff at and a 1.1 difference in volume is significant, especially when you take into account that it's almost double the volume that Domas shoots.

    I think that you're underestimating how much volume matters here. It was evident when you talked about Ben's "shooting" before. Ben Simmons has taken 34 3s in more than 9k minutes in the NBA. He's a total non-shooter. He doesn't even take mid-range shots. Even if he made all 34 of the 3s that he had taken, no one would respect his shot. It's so rare of an occasion that no defense should ever worry about it.

    Decent percentages on high volume create more threat and more gravity than amazing percentages on low volume.

    Darren Collison led the league in 3pt percentage in 17-18. He shot 46.5% from 3 -> https://www.basketball-reference.com...collida01.html

    James Harden shot 36.7% from 3 that same year -> https://www.nba.com/stats/player/201935/

    DC averaged 3 3-point attempts per game. James Harden averaged 10 3-point attempts per game. James Harden made 3 3-point attempts per game.

    Who do you think created more gravity that year? DC or Harden? The answer is easy.

    Sure, ultimately, you want both high percentages and high volume. That's the ideal. Not everyone is Curry, though.

    And please, don't get me wrong. DC did amazing that year and his shooting definitely helped us. Defenses absolutely had to respect his shot as 3 attempts per game isn't low or anything. I'm just using to example to indicate how a difference in volume can make up for a very significant difference in percentages.

    Another example I could use is Luka Doncic. Luka is a 33.1% 3-point shooter for his career. I want to remind you that you've been claiming for quite a while that 33% from 3 is a bad number. Luka is taking 8.1 3s per game in his career and he is creating the vast majority of these shots on his own with his step-back. Don't you think that defenses pay attention to this shot? Don't they try to take it away? If 33% at that volume was indeed bad then why are defenses trying to stop Luka from taking that shot? Why are they not giving him that shot? Defenses aren't stupid. Luka's step-back 3 is a powerful weapon and volume is a significant part of its strength.

    PS: And just to make clear so people don't misunderstand what I'm trying to say. I am not trying to compare Myles to any of these amazing scorers. I am not trying to say that Myles is an amazing scorer or anything of the sort. All I'm trying to point out is that volume matters.
    Players like Luka and Harden almost never get open 3s tho.

    Myles shooting from deep doesnt need defending IMO.

    He shoots 35% for his career. He has shot as high as 39% from 3.

    For a center, he is a good shooter from there.

    You give him a PG who knows how to deliver the ball to a shooter in rythym his percentage will rise. I have no doubt about that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taterhead
    replied
    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post

    Naw my problems definitely with Taterhead over here, who comes on to trash P fans, call us racists, talk **** about this city and expects that we're gonna take what he says srsly. He had nothing good to say about the Pacers or this town, and I've had enough. I don't care anymore, I don't wish to discuss it, but I have the right to correct you when you say it's not personal, I assure you, it is.
    Its personal, FOR YOU. I dont care about you or your opinion at all. I dont care if you take my opinion seriously, at all.

    I grew up here. That entitles me to an opinion on this place from my experience. And if you dont like it, well you can just go eat one. Ive been to hundreds of home games. Heard the racist bs for myself. I just speak in facts from my experience. I know the truth hurts. Go get some ice.



    Leave a comment:


  • OneMoreYear
    replied
    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

    I guess it depends on your expectations. To me, his presence keeps the defense honest. 33% is not "fantastic", but it's not enough where the defense will respect him enough at the possibility of him hitting a timely 3. If I wanted him to be a "3PT Specialist", then I would agree that his percentage is too low.
    On this I agree, all things being equal. But things are not equal when you're playing two bigs.

    I think the reason it bothers me more is this. If Myles were our true center (no Domas), then the PF spot is free to provide some of the spacing needs. I would not be bashing him in that case, but it's simply not so bc he MUST effectively space the floor and he does not.. Because Domas needs to play close to the rim, it's doubly important that Myles stretch defenses. I DO NOT think defenses respect him, I see them hang off of him badly, and I think it's bc of this simple truth: as long as they can cheat off him & he's still hitting 33%, those attempts are literally costing us points. It's around what 35% I believe that the extra pt from a 3 overcomes the loss caused by the lower percentage. When you've got a very good post player (two, really) that otherwise hit near 60% of their 2s, these shots compound to significant losses. Not to mention the long rebounds that can lead to fast break opportunities. Myles isn't the worst shooter by any means, but on this team and with what's needed from him, it causes problems.

    IOW it's catastrophic for a "twin towers" lineup to have both bigs shooting 3s in the low 30s. I think it's gotten worse as Sabo has gotten stronger, as teams know it's a greater risk to move away from Sabonis and defend Myles errant shot.

    Case in point. You could literally swap Turner and Sabonis' offensive roles, put Turner down low and Sabonis on the outside, and not see much difference. Turner is essentially as poor a shooter from range as is Sabonis. Teams would sag off Sabonis; they're already doing that to Turner bc it's to their advantage that he keep chucking.

    When you have "twin towers" one of those guys is playing the role of a floor spacing 4. Whether you call it Myles or Sabo, it's not possible for either to draw enough attention to pull guys out to the line. They don't do it.


    Teams learned long ago not to follow either of our bigs away from the basket. Don't believe me? Watch Turner's 3pt "highlight" reels, they're literally daring him to do it.

    These aren't handpicked. They're just a random look into several recorded instances of "highlight" nights he managed while absolutely no one is taking him seriously.

    https://youtu.be/KJvIVbT5fXw
    https://youtu.be/uUSn7pootvo

    https://youtu.be/uaIf-PkMPtM

    Last edited by OneMoreYear; 07-06-2021, 08:29 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
    You want to be a 3-6 seed and top out as 2nd round fodder, bring Simmons in to be your best player and give him 1/3 of your cap. Sounds like something this organization would do actually. It'd be fun during the regular season but we'd all want to gauge our eyes out come playoff time when the games count.

    Simmons has a fatal flaw IMO. I don't think you can win with him at that price point unless he has all world offensive players around him. The Warriors and maybe Portland make the most sense. A deal with Charlotte would be interesting if they can convince him he's a PF/C.
    This is Indiana.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Teams leave Turner wide open for a reason, because he is not a good shooter.

    Leave a comment:


  • LilSean320
    replied
    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
    You want to be a 3-6 seed and top out as 2nd round fodder, bring Simmons in to be your best player and give him 1/3 of your cap. Sounds like something this organization would do actually. It'd be fun during the regular season but we'd all want to gauge our eyes out come playoff time when the games count.

    Simmons has a fatal flaw IMO. I don't think you can win with him at that price point unless he has all world offensive players around him. The Warriors and maybe Portland make the most sense. A deal with Charlotte would be interesting if they can convince him he's a PF/C.
    That is better than what we currently are. We are currently a 6-10 seed with a group of 2nd and 3rd options. We need a star player badly and this is really our only chance to acquire a star that under contract for 4 more years, and has not entered his prime yet.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
    Onto Myles, I stand by my argument precisely bc A) Myles is used offensively as a PF, B) considering his deficiencies, his importance to us is predicated on him being an effective floor spacer.

    Your comparisons to every other C in the league aren't relevant bc on THIS team, playing alongside Sabo, it's asked that he operate as a stretch 4 and he's just .. not ... effective.

    Your typical C gets a pass bc he's also the teams primary post threat, ergo, has other value. It's critical that Myles stretch the D creating space for shooters & for Sabonis' low post game, in that regard he fails utterly, defenses do not respect his shooting and give him a wide berth.

    Myles as a stretch 4 is lousy, and guess what, that's what he is.
    That looks like nothing but hairsplitting to me. You could make that exact argument for most well-known stretch 5s. Brook Lopez (Milwaukee Brook Lopez, not Brooklyn Brook Lopez), Marc Gasol (late-era Gasol), Al Horford (Boston-era Horford), Kristaps Porzingis (Mavericks-era) et cetera. They were all used primarily as stretch players and not as primary post threats.

    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
    I ask you this:

    We all know Sabo is a poor 3pt shooter yes?

    Would you want to see Sabonis shooting 1/3 to half his shots from 3 at his current %? Of course not. It would be horrible.

    Then explain to me why it's okay that Myles does just that.

    This is how bad the wool seems to have been pulled over ppls eyes... if we regard Myles' 3pt effectiveness as ok or even "above average", you've gotta say the same about Sabonis... Because he's shooting less than 1% worse from 3 than Turner. Now, who's gonna sit here and tell me that Sabonis should be shooting over 4 3s per game?

    I'll hang up and take my response on the air.
    Domas is a 32.1% career shooter from 3 on 1.3 attempts per game.

    Myles is a 35.2% career shooter from 3 on 2.4 attempts per game.

    The difference between the two is significant. Both in percentage and volume. A 3.1 difference in percentage is nothing to scoff at and a 1.1 difference in volume is significant, especially when you take into account that it's almost double the volume that Domas shoots.

    I think that you're underestimating how much volume matters here. It was evident when you talked about Ben's "shooting" before. Ben Simmons has taken 34 3s in more than 9k minutes in the NBA. He's a total non-shooter. He doesn't even take mid-range shots. Even if he made all 34 of the 3s that he had taken, no one would respect his shot. It's so rare of an occasion that no defense should ever worry about it.

    Decent percentages on high volume create more threat and more gravity than amazing percentages on low volume.

    Darren Collison led the league in 3pt percentage in 17-18. He shot 46.5% from 3 -> https://www.basketball-reference.com...collida01.html

    James Harden shot 36.7% from 3 that same year -> https://www.nba.com/stats/player/201935/

    DC averaged 3 3-point attempts per game. James Harden averaged 10 3-point attempts per game. James Harden made 3 3-point attempts per game.

    Who do you think created more gravity that year? DC or Harden? The answer is easy.

    Sure, ultimately, you want both high percentages and high volume. That's the ideal. Not everyone is Curry, though.

    And please, don't get me wrong. DC did amazing that year and his shooting definitely helped us. Defenses absolutely had to respect his shot as 3 attempts per game isn't low or anything. I'm just using to example to indicate how a difference in volume can make up for a very significant difference in percentages.

    Another example I could use is Luka Doncic. Luka is a 33.1% 3-point shooter for his career. I want to remind you that you've been claiming for quite a while that 33% from 3 is a bad number. Luka is taking 8.1 3s per game in his career and he is creating the vast majority of these shots on his own with his step-back. Don't you think that defenses pay attention to this shot? Don't they try to take it away? If 33% at that volume was indeed bad then why are defenses trying to stop Luka from taking that shot? Why are they not giving him that shot? Defenses aren't stupid. Luka's step-back 3 is a powerful weapon and volume is a significant part of its strength.

    PS: And just to make clear so people don't misunderstand what I'm trying to say. I am not trying to compare Myles to any of these amazing scorers. I am not trying to say that Myles is an amazing scorer or anything of the sort. All I'm trying to point out is that volume matters.

    Leave a comment:


  • ksuttonjr76
    replied
    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post

    Naw my problems definitely with Taterhead over here, who comes on to trash P fans, call us racists, talk **** about this city and expects that we're gonna take what he says srsly. He had nothing good to say about the Pacers or this town, and I've had enough. I don't care anymore, I don't wish to discuss it, but I have the right to correct you when you say it's not personal, I assure you, it is.

    Onto Myles, I stand by my argument precisely bc A) Myles is used offensively as a PF, B) considering his deficiencies, his importance to us is predicated on him being an effective floor spacer.

    Your comparisons to every other C in the league aren't relevant bc on THIS team, playing alongside Sabo, it's asked that he operate as a stretch 4 and he's just .. not ... effective.

    Your typical C gets a pass bc he's also the teams primary post threat, ergo, has other value. It's critical that Myles stretch the D creating space for shooters & for Sabonis' low post game, in that regard he fails utterly, defenses do not respect his shooting and give him a wide berth.

    Myles as a stretch 4 is lousy, and guess what, that's what he is.

    I ask you this:

    We all know Sabo is a poor 3pt shooter yes?

    Would you want to see Sabonis shooting 1/3 to half his shots from 3 at his current %? Of course not. It would be horrible.

    Then explain to me why it's okay that Myles does just that.

    This is how bad the wool seems to have been pulled over ppls eyes... if we regard Myles' 3pt effectiveness as ok or even "above average", you've gotta say the same about Sabonis... Because he's shooting less than 1% worse from 3 than Turner. Now, who's gonna sit here and tell me that Sabonis should be shooting over 4 3s per game?

    I'll hang up and take my response on the air.
    I guess it depends on your expectations. To me, his presence keeps the defense honest. 33% is not "fantastic", but it's not enough where the defense will respect him enough at the possibility of him hitting a timely 3. If I wanted him to be a "3PT Specialist", then I would agree that his percentage is too low.

    Leave a comment:


  • ksuttonjr76
    replied
    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
    Hey Inyaface, I dunno if it's just me but I can't quote these sources the way you post them, it causes my browser to load Twitter every time?

    But yeah, in response, I'm open to acquiring the 7th pick from GS but anything 8-12 doesnt move the needle. Reason is, I think #7 will have access to one player who fell/got bumped when someone picking earlier tries to get clever and reaches on a Bouknight, Giddey, etc.

    That top 5 bunch, none of them will make it past 8th pick.

    As for Malcolm not being notified of being on the trade discussions, anytime your team is in the lottery, everyone should be prepared to be part of a trade. Anyone who gets offended about being talked about in trades on THIS team needs to check his ego lol.
    They're just saying that they usually let players know that they're being shopped. Since Brogdon didn't know, the assumption is that Indiana is not shopping him.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X