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

Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    I really like Eric Maynor from VCU. I think he would be a good pick if we pick somewhere at 11-13. He lacks some defense, but is a terrific offensive player. Jeff Teague would be another good pick IMO. I am starting to really consider a PG for our pick over a PF because of the uncertainty of TJ Ford's future on the team.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I don't agree on this part at all Imawhat. This is what I like most of all about his game in fact. While he will go in the air to make a pass it's almost always predetermined and done in order to create that passing lane.

      Contrast this with Eric Maynor (or Fred Jones) who will go lane and up for a shot, find that denied and then turn to make the wild salvation pass to the corner. Twill sets up passes with his motion, dribble, fakes and jumping.
      Isn't that what Jack was doing earlier in the year (jumping to pass rather that shot denial)? Jack's turnovers were different from Fred Jones in that he was jumping at the perimeter to make a pass.

      It's just a habit of jumping when passing, which I think is correctable. He did it twice in yesterday's game and both would've been turnovers had Mich. St. made an effort.

      Eric Maynor reminds me so much of Eddie Gill.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
        Jumping high is not a skill. Neither is making a monster windmill dunk - well, actually that is a skill but it's no more of a basketball skill than hitting a layup off a backdoor cut. MSU displayed more skill than any team in the Sweet 16 and are well above any other final four team.

        Doesn't mean they'll win - they may get out-athleticized by Carolina or even UConn (though I think they'll make the final before losing). But then they'll have lost because they couldn't match up with a team athletically, not because they lack basketball skill.
        Again-

        Im not quite sure what everyone is watching but I seem to be in the minority. Tyler Hansborough who is UNC MVP and has been for years (regardless of the Ty Lawson rhetoric from Dickie V) and Wayne Ellington are not highly athletic players and Lawson is hardly a highlight reel player either.............thats their 3 best players so Im not sure what or who you are referring to.

        Danny Green is and Davis is a monster in the making and probbaly their best pro prospect but they arent the reason UNC is winning a title this year.

        I guess Goron Suton is asthetically pleasing to you which is your perogative.........but 54-49 games against Penn St with Goron as the star is hardly must watch basketball IMO.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          I personally don't see anyone that jumps out at me in the 8-12 range that the Pacers most likely will be picking. There's decent players there, but no one who really helps our cause.

          What I personally would look into is a trade with a team like Minnesota. They have picks 18,25 and I believe 35. I would try to land 18 and 25, or at least 18 and the 35, which is like the 4th or 5th pick of the 2nd round.

          With those picks we would be able to address needs and also fill the roster with cheaper young talent, while dealing with possible departures of Baston, Rasho, probably Quis, maybe Graham and Diener. (Expect Jack, McRoberts to be resigned)

          With those picks we could address our athlete big needs with looks at Patrick Patterson, Jeff Pendergraph, Taj Gibson, Josh Heytvelt

          We could also address getting another defender on the wing. I'm personally hoping for a Rush and Granger starting lineup with Dunleavy being the 6th and being able to play his natural SF position.

          So we could look at SG depth with Quis probably on the outs, and possibly Graham
          We could look at Terrence Williams, Dionte Christmas, Tyreke Evans (if he can be taught to defend)

          A deal like this would also leave us our own 2nd round pick as well and may might be able to land another decent piece like Matthews or McNeal from Marquette, Adrien or Robinson from UCONN, Cunningham from Villanova, Danny Green UNC

          Or if Diener decides to leave, perhaps a PG in Darren Collison, Aj Price, Sherron Collins

          I think Minnesota would do the deal, or at least think about b/c it would give them 2 lottery picks to add some talent next to Jefferson, Love, Foye and the gang.

          The Pacers trade a lottery pick, but gain a pick a few spots out of the lottery, while obtaining another first rounder as well
          Last edited by pwee31; 03-31-2009, 02:25 AM.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
            I personally don't see anyone that jumps out at me in the 8-12 range that the Pacers most likely will be picking. There's decent players there, but no one who really helps our cause.

            What I personally would look into is a trade with a team like Minnesota. They have picks 18,25 and I believe 35. I would try to land 18 and 25, or at least 18 and the 35, which is like the 4th or 5th pick of the 2nd round.

            With those picks we would be able to address needs and also fill the roster with cheaper young talent, while dealing with possible departures of Baston, Rasho, probably Quis, maybe Graham and Diener. (Expect Jack, McRoberts to be resigned)

            With those picks we could address our athlete big needs with looks at Patrick Patterson, Jeff Pendergraph, Taj Gibson, Josh Heytvelt

            We could also address getting another defender on the wing. I'm personally hoping for a Rush and Granger starting lineup with Dunleavy being the 6th and being able to play his natural SF position.

            So we could look at SG depth with Quis probably on the outs, and possibly Graham
            We could look at Terrence Williams, Dionte Christmas, Tyreke Evans (if he can be taught to defend)

            A deal like this would also leave us our own 2nd round pick as well and may might be able to land another decent piece like Matthews or McNeal from Marquette, Adrien or Robinson from UCONN, Cunningham from Villanova, Danny Green UNC

            Or if Diener decides to leave, perhaps a PG in Darren Collison, Aj Price, Sherron Collins

            I think Minnesota would do the deal, or at least think about b/c it would give them 2 lottery picks to add some talent next to Jefferson, Love, Foye and the gang.

            The Pacers trade a lottery pick, but gain a pick a few spots out of the lottery, while obtaining another first rounder as well
            I think the 2 2nd rounders we picked up from Dallas are for 2009 also
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
              I think the 2 2nd rounders we picked up from Dallas are for 2009 also
              I thought one was for this year, and I think ours goes to the HEAT for the Stanko deal this year

              But yeah I feel we should try to trade with Minnesota for 18 and 25, or with Portland for 23 and their first 2nd rounder which is like the 3rd pick in the 2nd round

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                The last thing this team needs is to trade down only to get more role players. We need a big time PF or PG that can be the #1 or #2 to Danny. Adding role players will do nothing but leave us in mediocrity. I, for one, am sick of being in that position. The conservative views of this board kill me...at some point, we need to make gambles. Playing it safe is not going to get us a championship. If you want to trade this years 1st rounder, fine. Trade it for a 1st next year. Then at that point, we cant package them together for a higher pick. Lower 1st round/Early 2nd round picks are going to do nothing for us though.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Not to hi-jack the thread but if you're looking for another draft pick, call Memphis.

                  They have their own, early lottery pick as well as Orlando's late 1st rounder.

                  I'm not sure that the Griz want to add too many guaranteed contracts, especially one so late in a weak draft.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
                    The last thing this team needs is to trade down only to get more role players. We need a big time PF or PG that can be the #1 or #2 to Danny. Adding role players will do nothing but leave us in mediocrity. I, for one, am sick of being in that position. The conservative views of this board kill me...at some point, we need to make gambles. Playing it safe is not going to get us a championship. If you want to trade this years 1st rounder, fine. Trade it for a 1st next year. Then at that point, we cant package them together for a higher pick. Lower 1st round/Early 2nd round picks are going to do nothing for us though.
                    Great post. Thats exactly what I was thinking. We have enough role players (Jack, Foster, Murphy...). We need to add another All Star
                    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Apparently you guys see someone from 8-12 that I've never heard of. If we trade the pick for a vet... that's another story, but the talent after Griff and MAYBE Thabeet... to me... is the same throughout the first round and early 2nd.

                      Picks 13 and 17 appear to be working out for us. If the talent level is going to be the same, and you're not trading the pick for a vet. Why not get multiple guys that can make your team better?

                      Hey we got the 11th pick.. let's just take Jerryd Bayless, he was projected top 5 at one point.

                      Or let's trade down a few spots and get a solid draft pick as well as other help.... ding ding ding
                      Last edited by pwee31; 03-31-2009, 05:32 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                        Great post. Thats exactly what I was thinking. We have enough role players (Jack, Foster, Murphy...). We need to add another All Star

                        The other 29 teams in the NBA are looking to do the same, so where is this Allstar at that the Pacers can acquire that the other 29 teams can't?

                        Lets be realistc. You think Bird is going to pick an Allstar at #11? You think Bird is going to sign an Allstar FA? You think Bird is going to trade for an Allstar? With what Tinsley, Ford, Murphy, or Dunleavy's contract? The sad but realistic truth is the Pacers aren't in a position to get an Allstar. The best the Pacers can hope for is picking a player in the draft that can be developed into a good solid player for the future, or trade for a solid player that can help the team next year.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          How about somebody we haven't talked about much I don't think, Jeff Teague. Of course his team flamed out quite a bit over the last month but he's still an intriguing prospect and an athlete to boot.

                          "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                            Great post. Thats exactly what I was thinking. We have enough role players (Jack, Foster, Murphy...). We need to add another All Star
                            Actually, we don't. I don't know how long you have been a Pacer fan but the team had a lot of success in the 1990's without any real All-Stars on the team besides Reggie Miller. Dale Davis, Rik Smits, and Mark Jackson each made the All-Star team one time. Also the year Jackson made it he did not play on the Pacers. Derrick McKey never made it. Even Reggie was a sporadic All-Star, only making it four times in the 1990's and never after 2000 even though he continued to be a very important part of our team. During the early 2000's, when we were still pretty good, JO was our only All-Star except the year Ron Artest made it as well.

                            "All-Star" is the most overrated term in the NBA because it usually applies to players who may be exciting to watch but the manner in which they contribute to the TEAM is negligable at times. This is what you need to think about when you propose trading for "star" players, how do they fit in with our team chemistry? I see no regard to this in your trade proposals or how you view the makeup of the team. The Knicks up until 2005 or so had a ton of "All-Star" quality players but there was no chemistry or discipline on that team.

                            Danny Granger is our All-Star. I would love to have another All-Star caliber player IF they fit in to our scheme but "fringe" All-Stars are often the best TEAM players and have most of the same qualities of All-Stars.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                              Actually, we don't. I don't know how long you have been a Pacer fan but the team had a lot of success in the 1990's without any real All-Stars on the team besides Reggie Miller. Dale Davis, Rik Smits, and Mark Jackson each made the All-Star team one time. Also the year Jackson made it he did not play on the Pacers. Derrick McKey never made it. Even Reggie was a sporadic All-Star, only making it four times in the 1990's and never after 2000 even though he continued to be a very important part of our team. During the early 2000's, when we were still pretty good, JO was our only All-Star except the year Ron Artest made it as well.

                              "All-Star" is the most overrated term in the NBA because it usually applies to players who may be exciting to watch but the manner in which they contribute to the TEAM is negligable at times. This is what you need to think about when you propose trading for "star" players, how do they fit in with our team chemistry? I see no regard to this in your trade proposals or how you view the makeup of the team. The Knicks up until 2005 or so had a ton of "All-Star" quality players but there was no chemistry or discipline on that team.

                              Danny Granger is our All-Star. I would love to have another All-Star caliber player IF they fit in to our scheme but "fringe" All-Stars are often the best TEAM players and have most of the same qualities of All-Stars.
                              While I agree that all-star status is overrated I would push to say that we cannot expect to emulate the early 90s formula and win in today's NBA.

                              Then we needed more girth down low to contend with the Ewings, Shaqs, and Hakeems. Now we need a different approach. If Rush is able to escalate to a McKey type defense, then we are close. But is the need to find a Mark Jackson and Dale Davis (and Antonio Davis) what we need to succeed in todays NBA.

                              Lebron needed a Pippen, but never got that in Hughes. He did however got a deep resvouir of role players that compliments the system.

                              If we want the same formula as before, we have the wrong system. Hibbert is not our Smits. Danny is not our Reggie. The past has passed. If we want our future to be "almost" there like it was in the 90s. Then emulate that formula. But if we want to be more than "almost there" we are going to need a different formula.

                              We need more than an all-star. We need a super star that compliments our true assets. Danny is the only certain asset. Rush and Hibbert could be. But they have to show production in longevity for me to conclude that.
                              Last edited by Major Cold; 03-31-2009, 10:07 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                                Actually, we don't. I don't know how long you have been a Pacer fan but the team had a lot of success in the 1990's without any real All-Stars on the team besides Reggie Miller. Dale Davis, Rik Smits, and Mark Jackson each made the All-Star team one time. Also the year Jackson made it he did not play on the Pacers. Derrick McKey never made it. Even Reggie was a sporadic All-Star, only making it four times in the 1990's and never after 2000 even though he continued to be a very important part of our team. During the early 2000's, when we were still pretty good, JO was our only All-Star except the year Ron Artest made it as well.

                                "All-Star" is the most overrated term in the NBA because it usually applies to players who may be exciting to watch but the manner in which they contribute to the TEAM is negligable at times. This is what you need to think about when you propose trading for "star" players, how do they fit in with our team chemistry? I see no regard to this in your trade proposals or how you view the makeup of the team. The Knicks up until 2005 or so had a ton of "All-Star" quality players but there was no chemistry or discipline on that team.

                                Danny Granger is our All-Star. I would love to have another All-Star caliber player IF they fit in to our scheme but "fringe" All-Stars are often the best TEAM players and have most of the same qualities of All-Stars.
                                Instead of looking at the previous Pacers team, how about looking at elite teams currently. Look at the Cavs, they have Lebron and Mo Williams. Look at the Spurs, they have Duncan, Parker and Manu. Look at the Magic, they have Howard, Nelson, and Lewis.

                                Instead of using the term All Star, maybe I should have used "great" players (which is probably more open to interpretation). A team will needs like 3 players that can take over any game and have a lot of role players around them
                                "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X