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 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Speed View Post
    I mean, does anyone think Aldrich is any better than a host of back up centers that are on rosters all around the league?
    If I had to fill the Backup Center spot and had to choose between Aldrich and the vast majority of the Backup Centers on any other roster...I'd choose Aldrich....mainly for upside and the mere fact that most Backup Centers aren't that good in the first place.

    Not every Team is lucky to have a Jeff Foster, Big Z, Turiaf, Dampier, Pryzbilla or even Gortat on their Teams.

    I don't get the impression that Aldrich has a ceiling of being a backup Center. At the very least, as a likely top 10 Player drafted, my guess is that his floor is a somewhat decent Backup Center with a ceiling of a Chris Kaman-like Starting Center.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      Just to be clear, I am ALL for drafting Udoh ( see my many posts regarding taking Positional need into consideration at the 10th spot ). I'm just saying that when it comes to drafting.......I'd hope that Bird considers our obvious need for an athletic Frontcourt addition....but it wouldn't surprise me if Aldrich was available that he'd consider drafting him.

      Unfortunately, arguments in favor of draftinig someone like Udoh as opposed to Aldrich simply highlights the tiered level of talent beyond the 5th ( or even 7th ) pick. As many arguments that can be said for the Pacers drafting Aldrich....a counter argument can be made for not drafting someone like Udoh. Again, I'm not advocating drafting Aldrich....I'm just saying that if he was available....I wouldn't be surprised if the FO took a serious look at him.
      I agree with you that it wouldn't be surprising if they took Aldrich, which frightens me a great deal. I'm even more worried that they could take Motiejunas, though. He'd sure spread the floor...

      At the moment, Udoh and Ed Davis look pretty appealing to me given their potential, their skills, and the fit for the team. I'd agree both of those guys need to increase physical strength before they are going to be able to hit their stride, but we are now picking at around #10, not #3 through#6, where the physically stronger top bigmen (Favors, Cousins) are going to be selected.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
        I think the only way Bird missed is if Tyler is a bust and I just can't see him being a bust.

        I think a lot of our opinions of the 2009 draft will change after this off season. It sure would for me if we land a quality pg with some trades.
        No, he misses if one (or more) of those players listed becomes a star. We know what we are getting with Tyler. We always have. He was playing about as expected when the vertigo hit. He is what he always has been, except now he carries injury baggage.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          No, he misses if one (or more) of those players listed becomes a star. We know what we are getting with Tyler. We always have. He was playing about as expected when the vertigo hit. He is what he always has been, except now he carries injury baggage.
          I think that is a strange way of looking at probability. You're essentially saying that you add up the star probability every other player on the board, and compare that to the probability that the one player you actually pick is going to be a star.

          I think it is more fair to say that if the median player taken within 11 picks of Tyler [5 are better, 5 are worse] is better than Tyler it is definitely a miss. Of course, no one would be satisfied with "not a miss" so its fair to be critical of Bird if even 3 of those players are better.

          Glancing at the next 10 guys, only Collison is clearly producing in a major capacity. Everyone else has been a respectable backup or a non-factor. They may have higher ceilings, but they certainly have not set a high bar for Tyler to match.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by judicata View Post
            I think that is a strange way of looking at probability. You're essentially saying that you add up the star probability every other player on the board, and compare that to the probability that the one player you actually pick is going to be a star.

            I think it is more fair to say that if the median player taken within 11 picks of Tyler [5 are better, 5 are worse] is better than Tyler it is definitely a miss. Of course, no one would be satisfied with "not a miss" so its fair to be critical of Bird if even 3 of those players are better.

            Glancing at the next 10 guys, only Collison is clearly producing in a major capacity. Everyone else has been a respectable backup or a non-factor. They may have higher ceilings, but they certainly have not set a high bar for Tyler to match.
            It would be if I were talking about probability. You might be, but I wasn't really thinking about it that way. My outlook is more or less as follows: Obviously, we had two needs during the draft last year: 1) PG 2) PF. We knew the draft was loaded with quality PGs (although I don't think we knew it would be this loaded), and early indications had this year's draft as strong with PFs. We passed on a lot of PGs well within our range to reach for a guy who, at best, projects to be a high-level bench player. If one or more of those other realistic guys ends up as a star while Tyler dabbles in a Jeff Foster role, then I'll consider that something of a miss. Not a bust, but a miss.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by cdash View Post
              It would be if I were talking about probability. You might be, but I wasn't really thinking about it that way. My outlook is more or less as follows: Obviously, we had two needs during the draft last year: 1) PG 2) PF. We knew the draft was loaded with quality PGs (although I don't think we knew it would be this loaded), and early indications had this year's draft as strong with PFs. We passed on a lot of PGs well within our range to reach for a guy who, at best, projects to be a high-level bench player. If one or more of those other realistic guys ends up as a star while Tyler dabbles in a Jeff Foster role, then I'll consider that something of a miss. Not a bust, but a miss.
              I am sorry but that is just silly.

              If one guy beats out your draft pick then you have missed. The NBA draft is not that simple. Seriously, if any GM was judged with that type of scrutiny they wouldn't hold their jobs for very long.

              I think you are dabbling in the fortune telling business. I suppose the Lakers missed with Farmar when the should have taken Milsap.. You can take the highest payed NBA staff and see how they have missed with their draft picks.

              IMO, draft picks need to play themselves out and you haven't given anyone enough time to make a accurate assessment.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                I am sorry but that is just silly.

                If one guy beats out your draft pick then you have missed. The NBA draft is not that simple. Seriously, if any GM was judged with that type of scrutiny they wouldn't hold their jobs for very long.

                I think you are dabbling in the fortune telling business. I suppose the Lakers missed with Farmar when the should have taken Milsap.. You can take the highest payed NBA staff and see how they have missed with their draft picks.

                IMO, draft picks need to play themselves out and you haven't given anyone enough time to make a accurate assessment.
                No, not one guy picked below him. One of the realistic guys that we had in for a workout that may have been a possibility at 13. Look at my previous posts on the subject and I had a list of 4 or 5 guys that fit the bill. I really don't think it's that big of a stretch to call it a miss if someone that was a potential high lottery pick (Holiday) that also happened to fit a huge need for us becomes a star while our reach pick turns out to be a quality role player.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by cdash View Post
                  No, not one guy picked below him. One of the realistic guys that we had in for a workout that may have been a possibility at 13. Look at my previous posts on the subject and I had a list of 4 or 5 guys that fit the bill. I really don't think it's that big of a stretch to call it a miss if someone that was a potential high lottery pick (Holiday) that also happened to fit a huge need for us becomes a star while our reach pick turns out to be a quality role player.
                  The problem with that approach is that you get to take 4-5 swings while the actual GM gets to take one.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by judicata View Post
                    The problem with that approach is that you get to take 4-5 swings while the actual GM gets to take one.
                    Okay, well I'll go with Jrue Holiday then. It's not hindsight either, I have been the driver of his bandwagon since draft night.

                    Edit: I'm trying really hard not to play the hindsight game here. You will never hear me lambast the Blazers for taking Oden over Durant, because at the time, every GM in the league would have done the same thing. I'm not saying this is a miss because one or two guys picked below Tyler may end up with a better career than him. Obviously, that happens every year and we can't blame GMs too much for that. I am trying to keep it within the wheelhouse of the realistic.
                    Last edited by cdash; 05-04-2010, 12:43 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      What has Jrue Holiday done to make you think so highly of him AS A PRO? He has been not much more than terrible in Philadelphia. I am not saying that he won't be good, but to put him in a vaccuum with Hansborough to compare them, neither have done anything yet. Jrue is as much of a miss as Hansborough has been.


                      I can't believe I am sticking up for Hansborough. I need to see more games from him as a PAcer before I feel comfortable with that.
                      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        He was probably Philly's lone bright spot towards the end of the season. His shot looked pretty good (one of the knocks against him coming into the league), he can penetrate effectively and has some decent passing ability. Pesky defender as well. Oh, and he's the youngest kid from his draft class.

                        At 17, he's going to go down as a steal of Granger-level proprtions.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          I don't doubt his ability. I am just saying that he has does as little as Hansborough has at this point. I am huge on Bledsoe this year. He is of the same mold. Athletic guy who played predominantly PG, but their only year was spent at SG because the two best players on the team played PG. There was nobody going to play over either Jrue or Bledsoe at the guard position on their teams so they played out of position.

                          I am not doubting what he WILL be, but saying that Jrue has already been ten times the player that Hansborough has been and that Hansborough is a "miss" and Jrue "isn't" is a bit absurd. Jrue hasn't done anything yet. Neither has Hansborough. You can't say that a player is a "miss" after one year unless it has to do with character and work ethic concerns.

                          To me at UCLA, Jrue looked consistently lost playing off the ball. IMO I thought Bledsoe had a better one year in college than Jrue did. I think they will both translate well as PG's and I am not going to judge them as SG's. I think you will see Bledsoe move up the "perceived draft boards" from where he is right now. I think he will be right in our wheelhouse and I think a lot of the PF's will fall since there are so many solid ones. I think it will actually push the Whiteside, Orton, and Montejunias up the board based on potential since it will be fairly easy to get back into the late first and snag a PF with less potential. I could also see a guy like Alibi move up significantly since he is a true center and a very good defender. I think Udoh and Patterson will slide some once measurements come out. I think they will be great value where they are taken however.

                          I am not disputing whether Jrue will be a scrub, starter, or all-star. I am just saying he has not proven anything yet. Neither has Hanborough and annointing either one a "miss" is beyond ridiculous after only one year of sitting the bench and being injured.
                          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                            I don't doubt his ability. I am just saying that he has does as little as Hansborough has at this point. I am huge on Bledsoe this year. He is of the same mold. Athletic guy who played predominantly PG, but their only year was spent at SG because the two best players on the team played PG. There was nobody going to play over either Jrue or Bledsoe at the guard position on their teams so they played out of position.

                            I am not doubting what he WILL be, but saying that Jrue has already been ten times the player that Hansborough has been and that Hansborough is a "miss" and Jrue "isn't" is a bit absurd. Jrue hasn't done anything yet. Neither has Hansborough. You can't say that a player is a "miss" after one year unless it has to do with character and work ethic concerns.

                            To me at UCLA, Jrue looked consistently lost playing off the ball. IMO I thought Bledsoe had a better one year in college than Jrue did. I think they will both translate well as PG's and I am not going to judge them as SG's. I think you will see Bledsoe move up the "perceived draft boards" from where he is right now. I think he will be right in our wheelhouse and I think a lot of the PF's will fall since there are so many solid ones. I think it will actually push the Whiteside, Orton, and Montejunias up the board based on potential since it will be fairly easy to get back into the late first and snag a PF with less potential. I could also see a guy like Alibi move up significantly since he is a true center and a very good defender. I think Udoh and Patterson will slide some once measurements come out. I think they will be great value where they are taken however.

                            I am not disputing whether Jrue will be a scrub, starter, or all-star. I am just saying he has not proven anything yet. Neither has Hanborough and annointing either one a "miss" is beyond ridiculous after only one year of sitting the bench and being injured.
                            The Holliday-Bledsoe comparison has been on my mind too. I'm high on Bledsoe as well, but I think Larry's just oriented to prefer "proven" performance (e.g., Hans) over young potential, especially after the Shawne Williams fiasco. I'll be very pleasantly surprised if we pick Bledsoe ... and consoled only if we end up (even after a trade) with a Player X.

                            Totally agree about Alabi (whom I've referred to previously). Dude's raw, but worth a mid-first more than Cole Aldrich is worth a top ten, IMO. Alabi is a hoss.


                            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                              I don't doubt his ability. I am just saying that he has does as little as Hansborough has at this point. I am huge on Bledsoe this year. He is of the same mold. Athletic guy who played predominantly PG, but their only year was spent at SG because the two best players on the team played PG. There was nobody going to play over either Jrue or Bledsoe at the guard position on their teams so they played out of position.

                              I am not doubting what he WILL be, but saying that Jrue has already been ten times the player that Hansborough has been and that Hansborough is a "miss" and Jrue "isn't" is a bit absurd. Jrue hasn't done anything yet. Neither has Hansborough. You can't say that a player is a "miss" after one year unless it has to do with character and work ethic concerns.

                              To me at UCLA, Jrue looked consistently lost playing off the ball. IMO I thought Bledsoe had a better one year in college than Jrue did. I think they will both translate well as PG's and I am not going to judge them as SG's. I think you will see Bledsoe move up the "perceived draft boards" from where he is right now. I think he will be right in our wheelhouse and I think a lot of the PF's will fall since there are so many solid ones. I think it will actually push the Whiteside, Orton, and Montejunias up the board based on potential since it will be fairly easy to get back into the late first and snag a PF with less potential. I could also see a guy like Alibi move up significantly since he is a true center and a very good defender. I think Udoh and Patterson will slide some once measurements come out. I think they will be great value where they are taken however.

                              I am not disputing whether Jrue will be a scrub, starter, or all-star. I am just saying he has not proven anything yet. Neither has Hanborough and annointing either one a "miss" is beyond ridiculous after only one year of sitting the bench and being injured.
                              He looked great towards the end of the season. He's already a fantastic defender (just as good as Rush imo) with room to improve. His shot looked great at the end of the season, and he showed that he is capable of running a pro offense. There's a lot to like there. Plus, he's the youngest player in the NBA.

                              You people are frustrating the crap out of me. I didn't call Tyler a miss yet. I am right there with you saying that one year is not enough. I said if things continue to progress like this season, then the pick will be a miss. That is throwing out his injury problems too. I am of the opinion that he will be able to come back full strength from the injuries. Tyler, for being "NBA ready", sure did struggle as much as any other rookie did this year. His shooting percentage was low, and he had a real knack for getting his shot blocked. He isn't a very good rebounder or defender. Yes, he played with great energy and drew fouls really well. Yes, I think as he gains experience his shot will fall more consistently, but he is still an average at best defender and the reality is that he doesn't possess the physical attributes to ever be a whole lot better than he already is. That's why I keep saying--he is what he is.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                                What has Jrue Holiday done to make you think so highly of him AS A PRO? He has been not much more than terrible in Philadelphia. I am not saying that he won't be good, but to put him in a vaccuum with Hansborough to compare them, neither have done anything yet. Jrue is as much of a miss as Hansborough has been.


                                I can't believe I am sticking up for Hansborough. I need to see more games from him as a PAcer before I feel comfortable with that.
                                Didn't see this when I responded to the first post. Evidently you stopped watching the NBA once the Pacers were eliminated from playoff contention. Check his stats from about late January/early February till the end of the season. He was really, really good.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X