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

Do you like the pick and trade?

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

  • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Mike Bibby's corpse started for the Heat. Mario Chalmers (who I like) did too. Jason Kidd isn't what he used to be, yet his team won the title. You don't need a great point guard. You need a great team.
    I agree with your point, but I don't think the Heat are a good example, because the Pacers will never have 3 talents of the quality of LBJ, Wade & Bosh. Currently we don't even have one. We're going to need the talent to be more evenly spread throughout the roster, and like you said, we'll need to become a more than the sum of our parts in order to compete for a title.

    BTW I wasn't being sarcastic with my previous comment. I'm genuinely not very familiar with Hill's play, or what kind of ceiling he has. I just don't think the Pacers should be beyond the stage of picking the BPA in the draft, and IF there's a high chance Leonard or Singleton (who a lot of guys here were praying would fall to us) would become better players at their position than Hill- then I would say this isn't a good trade at all.

    Comment


    • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

      Originally posted by imawhat View Post
      Larry gave JOB his last unneeded contract extension. But he knows what he's doing, right Roy?

      I think Larry's done an excellent job overall, but he's not without faults and criticism.

      Nobody has to agree with my opinion, but it should be acknowledged as a valid point. We have a point guard with very specific strengths and weaknesses, and we traded for another point guard with nearly identical strengths and weaknesses.

      We have two left shoes now, and we still need a right shoe; someone that can do things that our other point guards can't do.

      The guy we drafted added some very specific needs/strengths to our rotation. We had room for him with Dunleavy gone and Rush on his way out in the rotation. And he's a hell of a talent, which is something else this team sorely lacks. And in my opinion, that's a lot to give up without significantly improving one of our team's biggest weaknesses. And on top of it, we gave up another pick and rights to another player.

      I love George Hill and I can't wait to see him play for us, but that doesn't mean it was a good trade. We'll find out in time, for sure. If this is a stepping stone that allows us to make a bigger move in the near future, then I'd be open to changing my mind.
      Wait a minute. Hill and Collison are nothing alike man. Polar opposites:
      Collison: small, fast, cant shoot or defend
      Hill: bigger, stronger, can shoot and defend.
      There are probably not 2 pg's on any team that contrast each other more than Hill/Collison.

      Comment


      • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

        Collison and Hill are almost identical in their ability to shoot, penetrate and run an offense. They're also extremely close in their court vision. Hill is a better defender, and they have different sizes.

        I'd make the argument that no teams in the league have two points with as many overlapping skills/weaknesses.

        Comment


        • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
          Collison and Hill are almost identical in their ability to shoot, penetrate and run an offense. They're also extremely close in their court vision. Hill is a better defender, and they have different sizes.

          I'd make the argument that no teams in the league have two points with as many overlapping skills/weaknesses.
          I am really amazed how people can see things so differently sometimes. I never in a million years thought I would read someone suggesting DC and Hill are similar. I honestly cannot think of anything they have in common. Their games are 180 degrees opposite. You should really watch Hill play a few games before making that argument. I guarantee you will backtrack on it when you do. They do nothing the same! Absolutley nothing.
          Everything Collison is weak at = Hill is strong
          Everything Hill is weak at = Collison is strong

          Comment


          • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

            I believe the Pacer thought process was that they wanted a guard and they compared Hill to Brooks, Burks, Fredette, and Thompson. Since the top guards were gone, they felt Hill was the best option. In my opinion, they would have kept Fredette or Thompson if available.

            I'm more dissapointed in trading Bertrans than Leonard, he's a stash away player who could be another Omar Casspi. It wouldn't have cost the Pacers anything and he could be a good player in a few years.

            Comment


            • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

              Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
              I am really amazed how people can see things so differently sometimes. I never in a million years thought I would read someone suggesting DC and Hill are similar. I honestly cannot think of anything they have in common. Their games are 180 degrees opposite. You should really watch Hill play a few games before making that argument. I guarantee you will backtrack on it when you do. They do nothing the same! Absolutley nothing.
              Everything Collison is weak at = Hill is strong
              Everything Hill is weak at = Collison is strong
              Agreed.

              I really don't see the similarities all that much.
              Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

              Comment


              • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                Originally posted by Psyren View Post
                Agreed.

                I really don't see the similarities all that much.
                Thats what makes the trade so good.
                Collison penetrates better than Hill, and Hill shoots a lot better than Collison.
                Hill defends much better than Collison.
                So, if the team needs a spark offensively or defensively, they can play these two at their strengths.
                Then the sum can be better than the parts!!!

                Comment


                • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                  I think Hill compliments a lot of our backcourt guys. You can play him with any of our point guards, and you can play him with any of our shooting guards.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    Bird did come out and say that he liked Tyler Zeller and wished he had declared for the draft...
                    I want the Bucks 1st rounder (unprotected) next year. I think they are bound for lottery land. Another team is the Nets's, Magic's, Hornets's 2013 First rounder.

                    Also the Hawks 2012 first rounder.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                      Not as bitter as I was about this trade, but still think we gave up too much/got too little back.

                      Not a terrible thing. Morway and Bird can redeem themselves by trading Rush and finding a couple good players in free agents. Deandre Jordan would be nice as would be Earl Clark (still think he could turn into a good role player).

                      Would Kenyon Martin be an option? He'd offer some toughness if he can be had for a decent price.

                      Hopefully we save most of our money for next year's free agency.
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                        I am going to ramble here and give my thoughts on our draft night.

                        First, we'll discuss what is not debatable.

                        Even if you don't think George HIll will help our team, or compliments us you cannot say it isn't a good trade. The ONLY thing we gave up was the 15th pick. Everything else was legitimate garbage and with the 15th, you're high if you think that player we'll turn into one of the best 6th men in the league.

                        This is a fact: Hill is a strong or one of the best 6th men in the league! I'm not arguing that he is a great player. Or he'll even perform well in Indianapolis. But I am saying this guy is a guaranteed good player. To act like this isn't a good pickup is insane.

                        OJ Mayo fans: Listen if you were one of those guys who felt like OJ "I take terrible shots daily" Mayo is a good pickup, then you have absolutely no room to argue that this is a bad trade. Hill scores more, is way more of a efficient scorer. Also, on top of being clearly a better scorer than Mayo, George Hill is MUCH cheaper than OJ. He costs nothing.

                        Now the rest is my general thoughts:

                        I like Hill because I'm obsessed with the type of players that contribute to actual winning. Hill is unselfish. He cares about winning. I love that in a player. Hill plays defense. Defense is extremely important to me, and is one of the reasons why I continue to doubt DC. And no, I'm not a DC hater, I just don't like that anyone can abuse him offensively.

                        Reasons why even as a wing/guard Hill is a great fit for the Pacers. First, consider Granger. Granger, as the best player on the Pacers owns the SF spot. We need him playing the most minutes as possible. Anyone behind him is simply a breather for Granger, nothing more. (Not trying to say Granger is anything more than just a good player). So it makes no sense to target a small forward. Now, we move to shooting guard. At 2G, we have Paul George, the future of the Pacers. Again, to acquire someone that costs any sort of money to play guard makes absolutely no sense when we think we are talking about hopefully a future great. (In other words signing someone like OJ for 6M a year to play 2G when in 2 years Paul will be better than him in every comprehensible way, is once again insane)

                        Now this is why I think Hill is an incredible fit for the Pacers. First, while no long term expensive solution for 2G, he is probably a better solution than PG in the immediate future. (whether off the bench or starting) On top of that, as DC is no guaranteed fixture at PG, Hill can only challenge him, maybe steal minutes, help play defense at a badly underdefenced position. It's a great fit. The guy provides scoring off the bench, which is badly needed. He provides defense at PG which is badly needed. He takes nothing from anyone. We wouldn't be investing any money in a guy that would be stealing playing time in the future from Paul George, who we all hope to be a stud.

                        One thing that is worth noting about Hill, who as many have noted is more of a shooting guard, is that he is extremely unselfish. Meaning, you don't see this guy as a future great PG because he doesn't have the great passing ability of people like Nash/Rondo etc. But he doesn't stall offenses. He is a willing passer who keeps the ball moving. Will he create offensive from great court vision and passing? No. But this guy will NEVER pound the ball. He's a contributer to true winner no matter what his role.

                        In SA people need to realize that the way their offense works they don't depend on great passing point guards. They move ball around no matter what the position. What you should take from this is that, we really don't know if Hill could develop into a strong passing PG. Again no one should ever expect that by any means! But taking assist numbers from SA as an accurate assumption of passing ability is just way off. It's a bit like LAL. They're the same way, they have an offensive system that depends on moving the ball through everyone versus depending on a floor general.

                        Off the bench having someone like Hill who can come in and score is a much needed addition. He may not be the best thing since sliced bread, but Hill is a guy that contributed to winning basketball. He's unselfish. He has a great attitude. He plays hard. He plays defense. These are the type of players that help teams win folks!

                        Seriously, if the Pacers had actually given anything up to acquire Hill people would have maybe a weak reason to be upset. But considering what we gave up? You're absolutely lost if you think the Pacers didn't make out like bandits in this trade.

                        This shouldn't be a polarizing issue. The Pacers got someone who is a strong player for nothing. He costs nothing. He's loyal. He plays his *** off. He has a ton of experience.

                        Folks, no one is saying he is a future all star. We're simply saying we got a strong player for NOTHING. Wake up and enjoy the moment.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                          I like the trade. Got a good player and I actually hope there's competition at point guard.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                            Originally posted by mattie View Post
                            I am going to ramble here and give my thoughts on our draft night.

                            First, we'll discuss what is not debatable.

                            Even if you don't think George HIll will help our team, or compliments us you cannot say it isn't a good trade. The ONLY thing we gave up was the 15th pick. Everything else was legitimate garbage and with the 15th, you're high if you think that player we'll turn into one of the best 6th men in the league.

                            This is a fact: Hill is a strong or one of the best 6th men in the league! I'm not arguing that he is a great player. Or he'll even perform well in Indianapolis. But I am saying this guy is a guaranteed good player. To act like this isn't a good pickup is insane.

                            OJ Mayo fans: Listen if you were one of those guys who felt like OJ "I take terrible shots daily" Mayo is a good pickup, then you have absolutely no room to argue that this is a bad trade. Hill scores more, is way more of a efficient scorer. Also, on top of being clearly a better scorer than Mayo, George Hill is MUCH cheaper than OJ. He costs nothing.

                            Now the rest is my general thoughts:

                            I like Hill because I'm obsessed with the type of players that contribute to actual winning. Hill is unselfish. He cares about winning. I love that in a player. Hill plays defense. Defense is extremely important to me, and is one of the reasons why I continue to doubt DC. And no, I'm not a DC hater, I just don't like that anyone can abuse him offensively.

                            Reasons why even as a wing/guard Hill is a great fit for the Pacers. First, consider Granger. Granger, as the best player on the Pacers owns the SF spot. We need him playing the most minutes as possible. Anyone behind him is simply a breather for Granger, nothing more. (Not trying to say Granger is anything more than just a good player). So it makes no sense to target a small forward. Now, we move to shooting guard. At 2G, we have Paul George, the future of the Pacers. Again, to acquire someone that costs any sort of money to play guard makes absolutely no sense when we think we are talking about hopefully a future great. (In other words signing someone like OJ for 6M a year to play 2G when in 2 years Paul will be better than him in every comprehensible way, is once again insane)

                            Now this is why I think Hill is an incredible fit for the Pacers. First, while no long term expensive solution for 2G, he is probably a better solution than PG in the immediate future. (whether off the bench or starting) On top of that, as DC is no guaranteed fixture at PG, Hill can only challenge him, maybe steal minutes, help play defense at a badly underdefenced position. It's a great fit. The guy provides scoring off the bench, which is badly needed. He provides defense at PG which is badly needed. He takes nothing from anyone. We wouldn't be investing any money in a guy that would be stealing playing time in the future from Paul George, who we all hope to be a stud.

                            One thing that is worth noting about Hill, who as many have noted is more of a shooting guard, is that he is extremely unselfish. Meaning, you don't see this guy as a future great PG because he doesn't have the great passing ability of people like Nash/Rondo etc. But he doesn't stall offenses. He is a willing passer who keeps the ball moving. Will he create offensive from great court vision and passing? No. But this guy will NEVER pound the ball. He's a contributer to true winner no matter what his role.

                            In SA people need to realize that the way their offense works they don't depend on great passing point guards. They move ball around no matter what the position. What you should take from this is that, we really don't know if Hill could develop into a strong passing PG. Again no one should ever expect that by any means! But taking assist numbers from SA as an accurate assumption of passing ability is just way off. It's a bit like LAL. They're the same way, they have an offensive system that depends on moving the ball through everyone versus depending on a floor general.

                            Off the bench having someone like Hill who can come in and score is a much needed addition. He may not be the best thing since sliced bread, but Hill is a guy that contributed to winning basketball. He's unselfish. He has a great attitude. He plays hard. He plays defense. These are the type of players that help teams win folks!

                            Seriously, if the Pacers had actually given anything up to acquire Hill people would have maybe a weak reason to be upset. But considering what we gave up? You're absolutely lost if you think the Pacers didn't make out like bandits in this trade.

                            This shouldn't be a polarizing issue. The Pacers got someone who is a strong player for nothing. He costs nothing. He's loyal. He plays his *** off. He has a ton of experience.

                            Folks, no one is saying he is a future all star. We're simply saying we got a strong player for NOTHING. Wake up and enjoy the moment.
                            In summary, this is a good very very solid trade that will only help the Pacers. It may not be an exciting move, but it is a good move that can only help the team.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                              Originally posted by mattie View Post
                              Folks, no one is saying he is a future all star. We're simply saying we got a strong player for NOTHING. Wake up and enjoy the moment.
                              I'm sure you wouldn't have considered our near-lottery pick as 'nothing' prior to draft-day, no need for such hyperbole to get your point across

                              I'm still undecided on my opinion of the trade, but pick 15 in any draft, especially when a projected lottery pick slips to that position, is most definitely not 'nothing'.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Do you like the pick and trade?

                                Originally posted by mattie View Post
                                I am going to ramble here and give my thoughts on our draft night.

                                First, we'll discuss what is not debatable.

                                Even if you don't think George HIll will help our team, or compliments us you cannot say it isn't a good trade. The ONLY thing we gave up was the 15th pick. Everything else was legitimate garbage and with the 15th, you're high if you think that player we'll turn into one of the best 6th men in the league.

                                This is a fact: Hill is a strong or one of the best 6th men in the league! I'm not arguing that he is a great player. Or he'll even perform well in Indianapolis. But I am saying this guy is a guaranteed good player. To act like this isn't a good pickup is insane.

                                OJ Mayo fans: Listen if you were one of those guys who felt like OJ "I take terrible shots daily" Mayo is a good pickup, then you have absolutely no room to argue that this is a bad trade. Hill scores more, is way more of a efficient scorer. Also, on top of being clearly a better scorer than Mayo, George Hill is MUCH cheaper than OJ. He costs nothing.

                                Now the rest is my general thoughts:

                                I like Hill because I'm obsessed with the type of players that contribute to actual winning. Hill is unselfish. He cares about winning. I love that in a player. Hill plays defense. Defense is extremely important to me, and is one of the reasons why I continue to doubt DC. And no, I'm not a DC hater, I just don't like that anyone can abuse him offensively.

                                Reasons why even as a wing/guard Hill is a great fit for the Pacers. First, consider Granger. Granger, as the best player on the Pacers owns the SF spot. We need him playing the most minutes as possible. Anyone behind him is simply a breather for Granger, nothing more. (Not trying to say Granger is anything more than just a good player). So it makes no sense to target a small forward. Now, we move to shooting guard. At 2G, we have Paul George, the future of the Pacers. Again, to acquire someone that costs any sort of money to play guard makes absolutely no sense when we think we are talking about hopefully a future great. (In other words signing someone like OJ for 6M a year to play 2G when in 2 years Paul will be better than him in every comprehensible way, is once again insane)

                                Now this is why I think Hill is an incredible fit for the Pacers. First, while no long term expensive solution for 2G, he is probably a better solution than PG in the immediate future. (whether off the bench or starting) On top of that, as DC is no guaranteed fixture at PG, Hill can only challenge him, maybe steal minutes, help play defense at a badly underdefenced position. It's a great fit. The guy provides scoring off the bench, which is badly needed. He provides defense at PG which is badly needed. He takes nothing from anyone. We wouldn't be investing any money in a guy that would be stealing playing time in the future from Paul George, who we all hope to be a stud.

                                One thing that is worth noting about Hill, who as many have noted is more of a shooting guard, is that he is extremely unselfish. Meaning, you don't see this guy as a future great PG because he doesn't have the great passing ability of people like Nash/Rondo etc. But he doesn't stall offenses. He is a willing passer who keeps the ball moving. Will he create offensive from great court vision and passing? No. But this guy will NEVER pound the ball. He's a contributer to true winner no matter what his role.

                                In SA people need to realize that the way their offense works they don't depend on great passing point guards. They move ball around no matter what the position. What you should take from this is that, we really don't know if Hill could develop into a strong passing PG. Again no one should ever expect that by any means! But taking assist numbers from SA as an accurate assumption of passing ability is just way off. It's a bit like LAL. They're the same way, they have an offensive system that depends on moving the ball through everyone versus depending on a floor general.

                                Off the bench having someone like Hill who can come in and score is a much needed addition. He may not be the best thing since sliced bread, but Hill is a guy that contributed to winning basketball. He's unselfish. He has a great attitude. He plays hard. He plays defense. These are the type of players that help teams win folks!

                                Seriously, if the Pacers had actually given anything up to acquire Hill people would have maybe a weak reason to be upset. But considering what we gave up? You're absolutely lost if you think the Pacers didn't make out like bandits in this trade.

                                This shouldn't be a polarizing issue. The Pacers got someone who is a strong player for nothing. He costs nothing. He's loyal. He plays his *** off. He has a ton of experience.

                                Folks, no one is saying he is a future all star. We're simply saying we got a strong player for NOTHING. Wake up and enjoy the moment.
                                I strongly disagree here. Davis Bertans was the best shooter in this draft in 4 or 5 years he could be starting in the NBA. He is really quite skilled just give him time in Europe to get his body right. He should of went in the 20s this draft.

                                I didn't like Leonard but I mean he will be a solid player in the NBA saying we got Hill for nothing is

                                I personally would have preferred Singleton+Bertans and add a veteran combo guard scorer in free agency. It isn't a bad trade and actually pretty good. But i would of went that route if i was in charge.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X