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

    Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
    Instead of looking at the previous Pacers team, how about looking at elite teams currently.
    Agree with the sentiment, but you have to remember it is hard for the Pacers to attract your typical All-Star player. They don't want to play and live in Indiana. We have to go by the very effective Utah (or San Antonio) formula of drafting well and possibly making a savvy trade for an exceptional player and turning him into an even better player. Yes I know Utah signed Boozer but if you look at how Utah has been successful in the past that is basically an anomaly.

    I think the difference between us is I have absolutely no faith whatsoever that the Pacers can attract big name free agents and that our abilities in trading for huge stars is limited. Maybe it is not but that will be my opinion until it is somehow disproved by front office moves.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
      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.
      I think we fundamentally agree on more that what initially appears. I agree that we need Dale and Antonio type players to compliment (and at times replace depending on the system the other team is running) Hibbert.

      I do think however that Hibbert is incredibly familiar to Smits and will contribute in a similar way that Smits contributed in the 90's, that is, being our main source of scoring down low. I do believe that Danny is clutch like Reggie, even though no one will ever be as clutch as Reggie, and that Rush plays in a way similar to McKey. I believe that it is possible to reconcile these styles of play with a new, "modern" system.

      Like I said in my above post to MT, I am skeptical on the ability of the Pacers to ever obtain superstar (as in Kobe or LeBron) level talent unless we by some sort of miracle win the lottery one year, which while nice to think about is not something that should ever be planned for. Maybe that means the Pacers are incapable of winning the title, I don't know, but I think we will have reasonable odds if we concentrate on fielding the best TEAM every year. Detroit was able to pull it off.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Detroit pulled it off because of a declining old dynasty (LAL) and an injured dynasty (if the Spurs were healthy, they would have beat the LAL). When you are built like the 90 pacers and pistons, there is a lot of fortune and luck in that. Lebron and Kobe transcends luck with great play.

        I agree that we may never get a superstar and we might get lucky and sneak in there. But Lebron is still so young. Howard and the Magic are emerging. Wade and the HEat will only get better. And then you have the Hawks, who I feel will never punch through because they lack the super-star (Johnson is close, but he is no Chris Paul...ouch).

        I want a champioship team. But I also want a team. And mediocrity maybe the trend during the economic woes. I am content in knowing that.

        Selecting mid-round players is going to be critical if we have a shot at making a splash in the playoffs. That and player development, which this staff is able to do more so than the previous.

        But I really feel that this staff is unable to use the formula of the 90s to succeed. I will support them in the effort, but my expectation is not high.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Saying we NEED multiple all-stars to contend is just ridiculous! You have to sit back and think why some are even all-stars. Fan voting... give me a break.. some are obvious picks and some are selected based off what they've done in the past. While others are rewarded simply because they're on a winning team. OH they have one of the best records in basketball and so they have to have multiple all-stars.. that's bogus

          They may play with one of the best players in basketball, or complaint them very well, and that make them an all-star, or perhaps they're just on a really good team where you could choose from a couple players because they ALL compliment each other well (Orlando) where multiple players have solid numbers.

          And these situations discredit the players who may not be on a good team, but it's a lot like they're padding their stats, which could be true, or they could be that good, that even though they don't have the help around them, the other team still can't stop them.

          So all-star is a thin line with me, it's all about getting players that compliment the other players on your team. If you do that, then the all-star consideration will be there because you're winning, and because players are getting better thanks to the players around them.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
            Saying we NEED multiple all-stars to contend is just ridiculous! You have to sit back and think why some are even all-stars. Fan voting... give me a break.. some are obvious picks and some are selected based off what they've done in the past. While others are rewarded simply because they're on a winning team. OH they have one of the best records in basketball and so they have to have multiple all-stars.. that's bogus

            They may play with one of the best players in basketball, or complaint them very well, and that make them an all-star, or perhaps they're just on a really good team where you could choose from a couple players because they ALL compliment each other well (Orlando) where multiple players have solid numbers.

            And these situations discredit the players who may not be on a good team, but it's a lot like they're padding their stats, which could be true, or they could be that good, that even though they don't have the help around them, the other team still can't stop them.

            So all-star is a thin line with me, it's all about getting players that compliment the other players on your team. If you do that, then the all-star consideration will be there because you're winning, and because players are getting better thanks to the players around them.
            maybe not to "contend" but to win championships, history says you do NEED multiple all-stars...as weak as this draft is, there are still a couple of players who could be available at the pacers' pick that could turn into great players (my preference derozan or evans). trading down like you suggest for crap picks will do nothing to help this franchise. if it's late round picks you want, talk bird into trading tj, quis, or jack for one of those picks. mid-late 1sts are always available. it's just about pulling the trigger to get the deal done.

            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.
              I knew there had to be at least one knowlegable basketball fan on this board. You are absolutely right on. Just because we have guys who have decent stats occassionly doesn't mean we are close to being a good basketball team. Brandon Rush is Mo peterson. Troy Murphy is a servicable PF with major flaws on the defensive end. We have no creators who get easy points in transition or at the foul line. We have no interior defender that can change games with his defense. We have inconsistent perimeter scoring from all of our guards. This team has a nice player in Granger and a collection of hard working role players that alwayd manage to hustle their way into 33-34 wins with a talent base that should produce 23-24.

              I credit O'Brien and even Bird to some extent for creating an urgency to win........but those extra 10 wins every year do nothing but insure that more role players are all we can expect from the draft.

              This years crop is actually worth taking big swings at however. I'd look to move either Ford or Rush for an extra pick to get Gerald henderson and I'd do whatever it took short of moving Granger to get a shot at Thabeet.

              I think we could realistically come out of this draft with Thabeet, Aminu, and Henderson and become the best team in teh EC in a couple of years.

              In another thread I suggested that we move Dunleavy and Hibbert to the Clips for Kaman (bad contract) and their #1. That pick could net us Thabeet.

              Our own would go for Aminu and a trade of Ford or Rush for a pick in teh low teens could go for Henderson although I think he will wind up going in 6-9 range eventually.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                I agree that we need playmakers, but Thabeet is not a playmaker by any stretch of the imagination.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Just by you even thinking about trading hibbert to get thabeet , is blasphemy ..
                  "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by UncleReg View Post
                    I agree that we need playmakers, but Thabeet is not a playmaker by any stretch of the imagination.
                    like an earl clark and jhonny flynn

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                      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.
                      Amen.
                      And he is the epitome of a jump passer too, and not with a plan at all.


                      With T'Will I just didn't see him do it much, and I balance that against dozens over dozens of really fantastic passes, not just creative but directly practical for the moment at hand.

                      It's a bit like Lawson's handles. Lawson keeps his dribble and is quick, but he has no creative moves at all and that worries me. He often won't switch hands, can't do those kinds of moves that TJ or even Quis do (or just doesn't at least), and doesn't do anything other than a few basic things very well.

                      That's Maynor, but not Williams. Maynor has a few key moves and he's good with them, but beyond that he hasn't shown much. Williams shows me something new every game.

                      Again, I'm done with hyping Williams because his tourney run did that for him and he's played himself right out of the Pacers hands. I'll be surprised if he's there past 10. The Pacers will not get T'Will.


                      I think the Pacers are 50% likely to end up with Blair to be honest.



                      Thabeet is a "playmaker" in that he makes highlight defense stops that can start something the other way. Of course you don't mean that and I agree with you. He just looks dazed on offense most of the time, and frankly he has that look on defense when he's not scouting the rim for a block attempt. If the Pacers won their way to 3rd and took him I'd be interested and I would start hoping for development. But I'd be prepared for the worst too.



                      Earl Clark can be a playmaker, but he's not a leader. I guess my concern with him is the same as with Budinger - there's no room on the roster for them. If you can trade Dun and you are losing (obviously) Quis then I suppose you have a spot, but if Dun returns he's going to push Rush back to the bench, let alone a rookie SF that's Granger-ish in his game.

                      And Budinger does deserve the mention with Clark. If you haven't watched him in awhile he's worth a look. Really aggressive at the rim and on defense, better with his handles, and still has his outside shot. Elsewhere I compared him to Brent Barry although I think he D'd up better this year than Barry.


                      to me... is the same throughout the first round and early 2nd.
                      I don't think it is personally, I think it's thin getting thinner. I think this year you get a good college player at 17+ that won't turn into a good pro, maybe 2 of the guys past 15. Remember that every year guys look great in college.

                      When I watch guys I'm just thinking about "is that a move I see pros use" or I watch how they are off the ball to see if they understand the game. So I see Danny Green and sure he's a nice college starter, but I don't really see him doing anything that plenty of pros do just as well. So how does he make an impact?

                      Last year a guy like Westbrook was clearly better than guys around him, more aware than guys around him, had huge vertical to go with solid handles and a decent jumper. That's stuff he could, and has applied in the NBA.



                      I like Evans but I'm not sure he goes past 10 and I'm not sure he's a star. DeRozen I didn't really follow, but when I go back to watch Pendergraph tomorrow night I'll watch him some too.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-31-2009, 06:31 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        All I can say is that I wish this gal could help me fill out my bracket next year.
                        Is that what we're calling it now?

                        Fun story though. Nice to hear she took her role pretty seriously.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          The thrill of T-Will is gone, NBAdraft.net has him falling to the late first. Clark is still in the late lottery, but I don't see the fascination of adding a 3 or another Shawne Williams clone. This draft is very strange, it's almost like if you don't have the number one or two pick, you'd rather have a mid to late round 1st to save money. Players like Curry, Blair, Evans, Young, and Williams are all available after the lottery. The way the Pacers are playing, it seems to validate this theory. Although, I do think Evans will move up to the top ten.
                          Last edited by eldubious; 03-31-2009, 06:49 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            IMO, I think T-Will will be available at 10. Though Evans will definitely be off the board by then.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              I guess I personally don't see the star quality in this draft, but I see solid players who can help a team win games. Do the Pacers need more then that... perhaps..probably, but there's other avenues we can look at besides the draft. I just think we have to use our draft position and try to maximize or make the most out of it.

                              Like last year.. we took Bayless, whom another of folks felt would or will be a good player in this league. We used him to get 2-3 solid pieces. Jack has been solid, Rush seems to be coming along and the jury is still out on McRoberts.. and I feel we need that again.

                              Either acquire extra picks due to our cap situation, or add in a contract and obtain a vet or two.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Again, I'm done with hyping Williams because his tourney run did that for him and he's played himself right out of the Pacers hands. I'll be surprised if he's there past 10. The Pacers will not get T'Will.

                                I think the Pacers are 50% likely to end up with Blair to be honest.
                                Shifting gears here....although many of us has probably suggested that we draft Blair cuz he's the very definition of an undersized Low-Post scoring/rebounding/defending PF......since you ( and many ) have paid attention to Blair in televised games.....how do you think Blair compares to another undersized Low-Post scoring/rebounding PF that Pacer fans have seen that has moved on to more "purple" pastures?

                                Is Blair more of a player that is closer to being Paul Milsap?

                                or

                                Is Blair more of a player that is closer to being Ike Diogu?

                                Diogu was always touted as a brute strength undersized Low-Post scoring PF.....but with an obvious low-BBall IQ, he couldn't hack it on the defensive end for the Pacers under JO'Bs high IQ BBall Defense. For an undersized PF that is broad and depends on his sheer strength to carry his game....I'm more concerned about Blair getting into foul trouble.
                                Last edited by CableKC; 03-31-2009, 07:44 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X