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

Duarte

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

  • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
    I guess we should define stars then. I looked at JO and Reggie as stars. I don't think Danny Granger was a star or guys like Artest or Rik Smits. Sure you can go back to the ABA days but in the modern NBA where players have way more power than they ever had in the 80s or 90s.

    We powder up good starters and slap the tag "face of the franchise" on them by default to sell tickets.. Dipo wasn't even a star player given that it was just a flash in a pan.
    I count all of the players mentioned above as stars but that can easily be a matter of perspective.

    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
    The point is we have more of a track record of either being viod of a true star or losing the one we have. All this 3 contracts talk is to push a narrative that we somehow missed out on a star with our pick. We know the probability of that being a true narrative and it would be disingenuous to keep on with that narrative as if we had strong odds to land a star with that pick.

    You very well could be correct that we missed a star level player with that pick. Age certainly is a predictor of value and increase production but you can not ignore that the odds were poor to even obtain a star with that pick regardless of age. Our odds were bad from the start and our odds are still bad and the odds will be bad for as long as the Simon's main goal is to make the playoffs every year.
    I heavily disagree with the notion that our odds of landing a star with that pick were bad. Our odds of landing a star with that pick were excellent. They were as good as they have been ever since that PG pick back in 2010. The 2021 draft class was one of the best draft classes that the league has recently seen. Having a lottery pick in that draft was a gift for our team. I mean, this draft has at least 3 players with star upside that were picked outside the lottery (Sengun, Keon Johnson, Jalen Johnson). It was an absolutely loaded draft.

    If you want to tell me that Simons is setting a low bar then have at it but you're doing the same by saying that our chances of landing a star with this pick were low to begin with. This was one of the best draft classes of the last decade.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Week 1 rookie ladder..

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

        I count all of the players mentioned above as stars but that can easily be a matter of perspective.



        I heavily disagree with the notion that our odds of landing a star with that pick were bad. Our odds of landing a star with that pick were excellent. They were as good as they have been ever since that PG pick back in 2010. The 2021 draft class was one of the best draft classes that the league has recently seen. Having a lottery pick in that draft was a gift for our team. I mean, this draft has at least 3 players with star upside that were picked outside the lottery (Sengun, Keon Johnson, Jalen Johnson). It was an absolutely loaded draft.

        If you want to tell me that Simons is setting a low bar then have at it but you're doing the same by saying that our chances of landing a star with this pick were low to begin with. This was one of the best draft classes of the last decade.
        People have written numerous articles and done numerous statistical analysis on loaded draft years and average draft years. It all adds up to the same conclusion which is that the probability of a star player being drafted outside of the top 5 or top 10 is really small. You can find a starter sure and maybe you consider a good player a star but I define it a lot more stricter.

        If you consider it a franchise altering player then I don't know what to tell you. The odds and the probability of the best drafts of the past 30 years all say that it is very unlikely to land this player outside of the top 10. Statistically it is an outlier if it does happen and your grievance would be based on a outlier which is irrational to me.

        I mean you can take any team drafting outside of the top 10 and do the math over the past 20 years. Do it with the Pacers. You got one example of a star player and the rest are a mixture of Tyler Hansbrough, TJ Leaf or trading away the future star player in the case of Kawhi. By no means do I think the Pacers are abnormally bad at drafting but I think they are average which is why you have one example of a star in that 20 years period. The odds are small and a lot smaller than fans like to admit.
        Last edited by Gamble1; 10-27-2021, 04:29 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

          People have written numerous articles and done numerous statistical analysis on loaded draft years and average draft years. It all adds up to the same conclusion which is that the probability of a star player being drafted outside of the top 5 or top 10 is really small. You can find a starter sure and maybe you consider a good player a star but I define it a lot more stricter.

          If you consider it a franchise altering player then I don't know what to tell you. The odds and the probability of the best drafts of the past 30 years all say that it is very unlikely to land this player outside of the top 10. Statistically it is an outlier if it does happen and your grievance would be based on a outlier which is irrational to me.

          I mean you can take any team drafting outside of the top 10 and do the math over the past 20 years. Do it with the Pacers. You got one example of a star player and the rest are a mixture of Tyler Hansbrough, TJ Leaf or trading away the future star player in the case of Kawhi. By no means do I think the Pacers are abnormally bad at drafting but I think they are average which is why you have one example of a star in that 20 years period. The odds are small and a lot smaller than fans like to admit.
          I'm willing to bet according to those studies Granger and Hibbert would qualify as stars as well.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

            People have written numerous articles and done numerous statistical analysis on loaded draft years and average draft years. It all adds up to the same conclusion which is that the probability of a star player being drafted outside of the top 5 or top 10 is really small. You can find a starter sure and maybe you consider a good player a star but I define it a lot more stricter.

            If you consider it a franchise altering player then I don't know what to tell you. The odds and the probability of the best drafts of the past 30 years all say that it is very unlikely to land this player outside of the top 10. Statistically it is an outlier if it does happen and your grievance would be based on a outlier which is irrational to me.

            I mean you can take any team drafting outside of the top 10 and do the math over the past 20 years. Do it with the Pacers. You got one example of a star player and the rest are a mixture of Tyler Hansbrough, TJ Leaf or trading away the future star player in the case of Kawhi. By no means do I think the Pacers are abnormally bad at drafting but I think they are average which is why you have one example of a star in that 20 years period. The odds are small and a lot smaller than fans like to admit.
            Then let's revisit the last 5 drafts, shall we? We'll focus on players outside the top 10:

            2020 Draft: Devin Vassell, Tyrese Haliburton, Saddiq Bey, Cole Anthony all picked outside the top 10. Tyrese Maxey and Imannuel Quickley picked outside the top 20. Desmond Bane picked at 30. None of them is a star yet and I'm not sure that anyone will become one but they can definitely be good starters.

            2019 Draft: Tyler Herro was picked outside the top 10 and Keldon Johnson was picked at 29. Matisse Thybulle gets a mention at #20 as well as a special defensive talent. Both Herro and Keldon Johnson are off to an amazing start in their 3rd year. Herro is currently averaging 23.3 while Keldon is at 18.3. Tiny sample size, of course, we'll see if they continue to be relied on to score as much for the rest of the season or if they just had a hot start.

            2018: Draft: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Miles Bridges and Michael Porter Jr were all picked outside the top 10. SGA averaged 19 PPG in his second year, 23.7 PPG in his third year and he's averaging more than 20 PPG this year too. Sure, he's leading a tanking team so that scoring isn't translating to success but the same was said about Devin Booker for a long while until their FO improved the pieces around him. Miles Bridges is averaging 25 PPG for Charlotte this year. Again, we'll see if that lasts or if it's just a hot start but, at the very least, Bridges is a pretty good starter. Michael Porter Jr. averaged 19 PPG/7.3 RPG last year for one of the best teams in the league. So, there are definitely some potential stars in this group.

            2017 Draft: Donovan Mitchell and Bam Adebayo both drafted outside the top 10. Both of them All-Stars, Mitchell a definite star. John Collins was picked at 19 and he just signed a huge second contract after being an integral part of a team who made the Conference Finals. OG Anunoby was picked at 23 and we all know how much Pacer fans are regretting not picking him. At least one star in this group (Mitchell).

            2016 Draft: Interestingly, this draft has our current team's best players. Domas was picked at 11, Caris was picked at 20 and Brogdon was picked at 36. Other than them, Siakam was picked at 27 and he did become the go-to guy for the Raptors before his injury. We'll see how he is when he recovers.

            So, these 5 drafts gave us 1 sure-fire star (Donovan Mitchell), a potential star (SGA) and a bunch of players who are either All-Stars already (Bam, Domas) or have all the tools to become one soon if they keep up their performance (Herro, Michael Porter Jr). It also gave us a bunch of good to very good starters (Caris, Brogdon, John Collins, OG Anunoby, Miles Bridges) and some of them may even still have some All-Star potential left.

            And, in my humble opinion at least, the 2021 draft class was much, much stronger and deeper than any of these draft classes. So, yeah, I don't think that it's irrational to hope that we'd unearth a star with that 13th pick. Heck, I wasn't even looking for a Giannisa, Kawhi or anything. I was looking for a Donovan Mitchell.

            In any case, if Duarte reaches Brogdon's level, for example, then I'm 100% fine with the pick. I just believe that we could have found the type of player (go-to wing like Donovan Mitchell) that our team desperately needs in this draft, that's all.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Ummm, Duarte can absolutely be a Donovan Mitchell.

              I may not agree with the underlying principle, but I understand why people who would rather have a 1% chance at finding a Giannis or Kawhi are disappointed with the pick. If you're expecting a Donovan Mitchell, I have no idea why you'd be upset.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post
                Ummm, Duarte can absolutely be a Donovan Mitchell.

                I may not agree with the underlying principle, but I understand why people who would rather have a 1% chance at finding a Giannis or Kawhi are disappointed with the pick. If you're expecting a Donovan Mitchell, I have no idea why you'd be upset.
                You may be understimating Donovan Mitchell a bit here. He's a legit #1 option. A guy who came into the league and averaged more than 20 PPG from the get go. A guy who was picked by a good team and helped them become a great team.

                If Duarte can be that then I'm gonna be absolutely ****ing elated.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post
                  Ummm, Duarte can absolutely be a Donovan Mitchell.

                  I may not agree with the underlying principle, but I understand why people who would rather have a 1% chance at finding a Giannis or Kawhi are disappointed with the pick. If you're expecting a Donovan Mitchell, I have no idea why you'd be upset.
                  Mitchell is what people here were expecting Vic to be. The main difference between the 2 players is that Mitchell will elevate his game in the playoffs. He sent Paul and Russell home in 6 as a rookie

                  Comment


                  • The probability of drafting an all star is around 6% outside of the top 10 according to this article. That is over 27 years of NBA drafts and the author attempts to address the anomaly that happens around picks 9 and 10. I am pretty sure I have posted this before or others have but the range is fairly tight for the late lottery which means the probability is not going to vary much from draft to draft in that range.

                    if the Pacers were drafting 10th then people would have a stronger argument here but that is not the case.

                    https://www.pdg-analytics.com/articl...r-correlations

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                      You may be understimating Donovan Mitchell a bit here. He's a legit #1 option. A guy who came into the league and averaged more than 20 PPG from the get go. A guy who was picked by a good team and helped them become a great team.

                      If Duarte can be that then I'm gonna be absolutely ****ing elated.
                      He walked into a good team. They made the second round the year before he got there, he evidently hasn't made them much better as they've not gotten any further than that despite adding other good pieces like Conley and Bogdanovic on top of the 3x DPOY. He's an All-Star level player, sure, but he's not going to be the best player on a team that makes a deep playoff run. I feel that's about the level where Duarte will top out, he will just do it with slightly worse offense but slightly better defense.

                      Frankly, if anything the Jazz are evidence in favor of the idea that a team of well-coached very good players but no superstars isn't good enough.
                      Last edited by SaintLouisan; 10-27-2021, 11:02 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

                        People have written numerous articles and done numerous statistical analysis on loaded draft years and average draft years. It all adds up to the same conclusion which is that the probability of a star player being drafted outside of the top 5 or top 10 is really small. You can find a starter sure and maybe you consider a good player a star but I define it a lot more stricter.

                        If you consider it a franchise altering player then I don't know what to tell you. The odds and the probability of the best drafts of the past 30 years all say that it is very unlikely to land this player outside of the top 10. Statistically it is an outlier if it does happen and your grievance would be based on a outlier which is irrational to me.

                        I mean you can take any team drafting outside of the top 10 and do the math over the past 20 years. Do it with the Pacers. You got one example of a star player and the rest are a mixture of Tyler Hansbrough, TJ Leaf or trading away the future star player in the case of Kawhi. By no means do I think the Pacers are abnormally bad at drafting but I think they are average which is why you have one example of a star in that 20 years period. The odds are small and a lot smaller than fans like to admit.
                        Pick 13 since 1999 has produced:

                        Corey Maggette
                        Ric; hard Jefferson
                        (10 years of guys like Telfair, Sefolosha, Markieff Morris, Brandon Rush, Psycho T, etc)
                        Lavine
                        Booker
                        Herro
                        (and Kira Lewis Jr. who we're still not sure about)

                        So 5/22 or so. Not so amazing, but not a bad chance of hitting on a real player.

                        Edit: I might be giving Herro too much credit. I don't think he's really earned his spot on this list, but it seems like most think it's a foregone conclusion that he becomes better than what we saw in the bubble (which was good for a rookie).

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                          He walked into a good team. They made the second round the year before he got there, he evidently hasn't made them much better as they've not gotten any further than that despite adding other good pieces like Conley and Bogdanovic on top of the 3x DPOY. He's an All-Star level player, sure, but he's not going to be the best player on a team that makes a deep playoff run. I feel that's about the level where Duarte will top out, he will just do it with slightly worse offense but slightly better defense.

                          Frankly, if anything the Jazz are evidence in favor of the idea that a team of well-coached very good players but no superstars isn't good enough.
                          Feel free to ask Jazz fans about it then. They won the equivalent of 60 games last year, led by Mitchell. As Motion Offense pointed out, Mitchell is what we hoped Oladipo to be for us and for a very split second here, Dipo was very close to PG. And that's a star, my friend. Not merely an All-Star. A full-fledged star. That's what Mitchell is.

                          If Duarte becomes a star then I'm gonna be absolutely elated. I really hope that you're right and that he becomes a full-fledged star like Mitchell. I'm just not counting it. But maybe he can become a Brogdon-level starter which is still good enough. It beats my initial fear that he'd be a Justin Holiday-level player.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                            He walked into a good team. They made the second round the year before he got there, he evidently hasn't made them much better as they've not gotten any further than that despite adding other good pieces like Conley and Bogdanovic on top of the 3x DPOY. He's an All-Star level player, sure, but he's not going to be the best player on a team that makes a deep playoff run. I feel that's about the level where Duarte will top out, he will just do it with slightly worse offense but slightly better defense.

                            Frankly, if anything the Jazz are evidence in favor of the idea that a team of well-coached very good players but no superstars isn't good enough.
                            Yeah, a guy walked into 29ppg, 5rpg, and 5apg in the playoffs (with a crap Sophomore slump bringing it down) on 44% from the field, and 39% from distance. This is an absolutely terrible take imo.

                            In the bubble year, Conley missed a couple games, and Bojan missed all of them. Last year in round one, I remember Bojan and Conley both playing very well, but Mitchell was clearly the number one guy on the team. When they lost to the Clippers, Donovan was ridiculous, but couldn't get help to close the games. He was the only guy to consistently elevate his play in the playoffs the last two seasons.

                            I guess you just don't watch that team, because if Duarte became D Mitchell, I'd crap my pants and make my own "Pritchard MVP" shirt.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ichi View Post

                              Yeah, a guy walked into 29ppg, 5rpg, and 5apg in the playoffs (with a crap Sophomore slump bringing it down) on 44% from the field, and 39% from distance. This is an absolutely terrible take imo.

                              In the bubble year, Conley missed a couple games, and Bojan missed all of them. Last year in round one, I remember Bojan and Conley both playing very well, but Mitchell was clearly the number one guy on the team. When they lost to the Clippers, Donovan was ridiculous, but couldn't get help to close the games. He was the only guy to consistently elevate his play in the playoffs the last two seasons.

                              I guess you just don't watch that team, because if Duarte became D Mitchell, I'd crap my pants and make my own "Pritchard MVP" shirt.
                              Imaging call the guy who has the 3rd highest playoff scoring game not a star. He averages 29 points for his career in the playoffs

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Ichi View Post

                                Pick 13 since 1999 has produced:

                                Corey Maggette
                                Ric; hard Jefferson
                                (10 years of guys like Telfair, Sefolosha, Markieff Morris, Brandon Rush, Psycho T, etc)
                                Lavine
                                Booker
                                Herro
                                (and Kira Lewis Jr. who we're still not sure about)

                                So 5/22 or so. Not so amazing, but not a bad chance of hitting on a real player.

                                Edit: I might be giving Herro too much credit. I don't think he's really earned his spot on this list, but it seems like most think it's a foregone conclusion that he becomes better than what we saw in the bubble (which was good for a rookie).

                                Again you can just look at the figure one graph and see the range for that pick. It's certainly not a high enough percentage to feel like the Pacers had a good chance for a star which is what some on here felt.

                                Nuntius argument will fall back on that this was a deep draft which is based on no real data other than projections which are inheriantly highly variable and inaccurate.

                                The issue is that there is plenty of evidence in that range to adjust one's expectations on and for me that is clearly represented in the graph over a long enough period of time for every single pick in the draft going back 27 years. If there was an anomaly in the pick range it would show up in a large enough data set. It doesn't show up so it is an irrational expectation to expect a star with that pick.

                                Certianly that puts cold water on peoples high expectations but it also reality. We are unlikely to change the course of the franchise with the modus operandi of the last decade or more. I think most people agree with that sentiment.
                                Last edited by Gamble1; 10-28-2021, 10:38 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X