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

why does everyone want a new pf?

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

  • #61
    Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    Is that really how it works? That doesn't sound right to me at all. Why would the final years of their contracts come off the books when they aren't being paid for that final year?
    This is why Mike Bibby agreed to give away his 6m dollar salary for 2011-2012 to buy out and go chase a ring last year. He was very confident a whole season would be missed.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
      Exactly.

      If someone will make a Michael Bay style Youtube highlight video with "Front to Back" blasting through my speakers, I'll totally forgot about the lackluster shooting percentages, defense, rebounding, black hole playing style, and massive inconsistency.

      **Full disclosure: I had to Google Xzibit to find the name of one of his songs**
      i agree 100% we don't hate because of that. That is crazy talk and would be ludicrous. I just hate the way he plays the game the way that if you give him the ball he would rather get blocked than pass. I just like more team basketball and i hate Tyler's style. If he was 6'11 and a good defender and good rebounder i could deal with it but unfortunately he is not.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        Until he shows me otherwise, I will view him as a "very solid Backup PF that can be a decent short-term Emergency Starting PF".

        As some have said before....I'd prefer that he play an "intense/high energy" 24 mpg against the 2nd unit of most Teams while mixing it up with Starting PFs from time to time to change the pace of the game.

        IMHO.....he'd be far more effective as a Backup PF then he would be a Starting PF.
        i agree with this. i would prefer him as our backup and have a taller pf who can give us some solid minutes at center as well. someone who is a solid 6'10 or taller who can give us some good shot-blocking capability and post defense to help roy. tyler will never be that kind of guy because he just isn't tall enough.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

          Since we are discussing points of weakness…..

          I think the PG spot is locked up now for the foreseeable future with Collison & Hill……Daren gets a lot of hate for a 2nd year guy at a position that is arguable the toughest to get acclimated to at this level of play. Not to mention the fact that he has actually put up respectable if not what expected numbers in the process.

          SG in my eyes is still a weak point in our rotation. I love the Hill signing, and I think he can play spot minutes here, and effectively….but at the end of the day he is 6'3 and really fits in better at PG. Paul George fancies himself a SG, but I see him as a SF over the long haul as Danny continues to age….he is the heir apparent at that position as I see it. The X-Factor could be Lance Stevenson….regardless of TBTB the kid is a SG not a PG….so maybe he shows this season that he is on the right track in his maturation process to warrant some hope here…..but at the moment we have to consider this a position to continue to look for the long term answer.

          SF is obviously our strongest position with Danny, Paul and even Jones playing here in stretches…..this is our least worrisome position so I wont wast anytime talking about it.

          Ah PF….the much maligned roster spot in our rotation. I agree and disagree with many people on the boards sentiments here. I am a big Hansbrough fan although I am still not decided one way or the other if he is the answer as a starter. He basically missed his entire rookie year with the vertigo problem, not to mention the fact that when he did play he played for "the one we shall not name" Both of those things worked against his development in a big way. He then spent half this past season playing under the same sporadic coaching regime. Lets go ahead and forget about the "undersized" argument. Tyler is 6'9.5. This is combine measurement, not a number thrown out by himself or his agent to make him look better. This is legit NBA PF size…..I think to many people are stuck in the school of thought before he got to the league that ESPN analysts were preaching about him being listed as 6'9 in college but he likely measure out at 6'7 at the combine….he has legit size, get past it. I do worry some about the vertigo's long lasting effects, so that is a concern. He also isn't a high flying, above the rim, shot blocking, rebounding machine…..I think we could use a player like that as well, as either a starter to better complement Roy, or as a spark off the bench, it remains to be seen which would be better…..I think we need to see more of Tyler finally under a consistent coaching staff before making this conclusion. I hope we at least get half a season this year to get a feel for just that. I wont even continue my argument against signing David West….31yo PF coming off major knee surgery….absurd. Nene should have been able to dominate playing with Carmello, Chauncey and co……he didn't….why should we want him now on a bloated long term contract…..not to mention his injury history. Tyson wont leave Dallas unless he's going to another team with equal chance to content….we aren't that team….oh and he is still just a 10/10/2 guy playing with the likes of Chris Paul, Jason Kidd…..2 of the best PGs ever to play the game….do we really want him for the $ he will command anyway? The fact is to get one of these coveted FA PFs everyone is so in love with we will have to overpay not only on their $ value…..but on their value to our team as well…..we are a young exciting team with a good solid nucleus….but we are not ready to contend just yet….so why act like a team that is, and overpay for veterans that will be washed up when our youth is finally coming together and they are just a large burden of a contract with 2years left on the deal? I think we need to be looking at 2 diff options, or some of both. A - good veterans that wont be asking to break the bank to continue to help us make the playoffs so our youth continues to garner playoff experience….guys like: Kirilenko, Chuck Hayes, Kwame Brown or B - guys who are young enough that they can develop with our young guys to hit stride at around the same time such as: Jordan Hill, Varejao, Jason Thompson, Ilyasova, Humphries (if price is right), etc.

          As for C I really like Roy….been a little disappointed with his ability to show up in big situations…..but again I want to see him a full season under a new coaching staff. We def need some depth here, I would like to get a guy at PF/C that can play both spots as opposed to another guy like Roy who is regulated to just one position. Foster has at least 1-2 years left I think of effectiveness if we can cut his minutes way down until the playoffs….thats if he chooses to resign. I think McRoberts can play spot minutes here as well, he cant hang with the Dwight Howards of the league…..but lets be honest there aren't THAT many of those types of Centers around anymore. I hope we are able to retain Josh (this was prob better suited for the PF discussion but oh well) I think he is still young enough that he has some real upside with his skillset….crossing my fingers he doesn't get a big deal that we just cant match elsewhere.

          At the end of the day I really like where we are headed as a franchise. I think Bird has more than redeemed himself in my eyes from 3-4 years ago. A few questionable moves here and there, but you cant hit a home run every time. I think the move to acquire Hill was great. Hopefully we can fill out our front court rotation without breaking the bank on a soon to be over the hill veteran and I will be happy moving forward.
          Last edited by Wylder1324; 07-01-2011, 07:33 PM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

            Originally posted by Wylder1324 View Post
            Since we are discussing points of weakness...
            I like the way you have addressed the question. What the Pacers need to get to the next level (and especially subsequent levels) is not merely a question of wanting or needing a new PF, but rather a question of strengthening areas where we are weak.

            It has been very easy for many of us, me included, to look at our front court and state that one of our biggest weaknesses is front court defense. But, certainly part of the reason that our front court defense has been perceived as less than adequate is because they often found themselves in a catch-22 situation attempting to cover for perimeter players that were not able to contain their men. It's pretty difficult to prevent your own man from being positioned at the rim when you are drawn out a step or two to pick up a penetrating guard.

            But, in the playoffs we were able to learn that George is a very good man-on-man defensive player. With that as a starting point, I am confident that he will quickly learn to also be a good "team defender" on the perimeter as well. We recently picked up Hill who is a very good perimeter defender and will prove helpful in defending at both guard positions. Personally, I hope we keep DJones around for awhile because he is also a very good perimeter defender. So, we have either acquired players or I am confident that our current roster is capable of providing a player at either guard position that is able to provide very good defense. However, we do have Collison that will be playing a lot of minutes at the point, so his perimeter defense must still be viewed as a source of weakness.

            Offensively, the guard positions must become a more consistent in both scoring and facilitating the offense. I believe that George will continue to improve and will actually become more consistent at both ends of the floor, and I believe that a full season under Vogel might help Collison to become a better facilitator. Of course, the acquisition of Hill will also help stabilize the point production and playmaking in the backcourt.

            Obviously, I am a firm believer that any perceived weaknesses in the backcourt will be improved upon in the coming season... if we have a season anyway. Our backcourt problems will not by any means be completely resolved, but we will know a lot more about our capabilities at the conclusion of next season than we know now. So, with the acquisition of Hill, we haven't made a major move, but have certainly accomplished an important "tweak". If this is our only backcourt acquisition, it will prove to be a good one because I think Hill will help Collison and George grow and will certainly help stabilize the backcourt.

            As for SF, I don't think Danny is going anywhere, nor would I want or expect him to go anywhere. From an offensive standpoint, he consistently produces, although I would encourage him to seek more of his points from mid-range or even at the rim. Defensively, my hope is that more offensive production from his teammates will make Danny feel as though he can expend as much energy on the defensive end of the court as he does offensively. But regardless of how Granger plays, I would never state that SF is a source of weakness for the Pacers. And, Granger can be capably backed up by George or even DJones for short stretches.

            That leaves us with the front court. The plain and simple opinion that I have regarding our front court is that we do not have a starting pair that can provide consistent scoring and rebounding while also combining to provide the level of defense that will enable us to achieve the next level or two it is not capable of providing consistent point production. I believe that Hibbert and Hansbrough can coexist with respect to their offensive games... and just like our backcourt, these two guys could be expected to gain more offensive consistency as they mature.

            Unfortunately, I cannot agree with those that believe that the combined defensive game of Hibbert/Hansbrough can be considered adequate, or for that matter, will ever mature to anything that will ever closely resemble adequate.

            As defenders, clear and simple, they do not fit well together from a defensive perspective. And that would even consider the additional help they might receive as our backcourt players mature and learn to prevent lane penetration. I believe that either one could start, but that the other would need to be replaced with a stronger defensive presence. Considering that I think TPTB probably values Hibbert as the more probable long-term solution at his position, I think that the best alternative for strengthening the front court is to either acquire a PF that scores so darn many points that defense is no longer as important, or that we acquire a more rounded PF that provides a respectable scoring and rebounding presence while also providing very good defense.

            I think one thing should be made clear. The acquisition of Hill along with the continuing maturity of our younger players may be enough to enable the Pacers to eventually climb to a 5th seed or so, but without a front court that fits together better, I see dim prospects for the Pacers climbing into 2nd or 3rd seed territory.

            Without being able to man flat-out scorers at just about every position on the court, a team that expects to go deep into the playoffs must be able to have lineups well-balanced with offensive and defensive abilities. We have perimeter players that might be able to provide that. But I do not believe we have a combination of players capable of providing that in our front court.

            With that understanding, my opinion is that front court defense is our area of biggest need. And, with the opinion that TPTB values Hibbert far more than any of our front court players, I believe that the position perceived by TPTB to be able to provide the biggest boost for shoring up our front court weaknesses is PF.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

              Nobody on here is even questioning the fact that Tyler cant improve his game. Critics of his game need to realize this even Blake Griffen & Paul George have faults in their game. Paul George cant take anybody to the rack even Brian Scalebrini and Griffen cant shoot 17 footers like Tyler. The NBA is a great league of & every player in it gets burned a time or two.

              The key to this team IMO is DC. He needs to get stronger. He needs to be able to penetrate. Lance can do this but he also has no problem driving into 4 defenders and turning the ball over. He also has a problem getting in the game.

              I really hope George Hill can defend and hit open shots as advertised and b/c the Tyler was our top mid range scorer last year. That is not a good sign when your PF is a better shooting option than the SG.

              When it is all said & down Tyler will have a better career than Blake Griffen.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                Originally posted by Lou Bega View Post


                When it is all said & down Tyler will have a better career than Blake Griffen.


                Thanks for the laugh so early in my day!

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                  Originally posted by Lou Bega View Post
                  When it is all said & down Tyler will have a better career than Blake Griffen.
                  My suggestion is that you get a new username, and try to build back your reputation after this comment.

                  (just messing with you)

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                    Im praying we get NENE. He adds size and skills to our already promising core. That does not mean I dont like Tyler. Adding NENE allows us to maximize a player like Tylers effectiveness and impact on the game. I am happy with the way this team is building. We are a true team. We will be deep and able to compete over the long haul.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                      Tyler has playoff experience something Blake has yet to taste. I AM FIRM believer in hansbrough. I dont knock posters when they really believe DG33 is not a better b-baller than Paul George.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                        Tyler is coming off his second season after a truncated first season where he dealt with injuries and rehab. Tyler had games this year that made everyone on this forum love him, and games that made everyone hate him. That's the life of a young player.

                        What we know is that this team is full of hard workers. Roy, PG, DG, Foster, Hill, and Hansbrough are all hard workers, and my guess is that the whole team feels the same way as Granger after being in the playoffs, and they all want to improve so they can go back. Tyler averaged 14/6 as a starter in what you could almost consider his rookie season. He's strong, he's got tremendous work ethic, and a great attitude.

                        I am confident that he's going to improve his game along with DC and George and Roy, and those four will all become very good players. Add in Granger and Hill and some solid backups, and we've got a very good team assuming these guys can reach their potential.

                        The other side of the coin is that I feel SG is a much bigger area of need than PF. If we could add a dynamic, and I mean top tier, SG then the rest of this roster is perfectly fine. If we add a real superstar at any position, then the rest of this roster is perfectly fine.

                        I guess my point is, I don't know what you guys want. It's pretty obvious that no one on this team is a natural superstar like LeBron, DRose, or John Wall. But I think it's also obvious that these guys are also pretty good ball players in need of one really good ball player. Whether that comes at PF, PG, SG, or waterboy, the rest of the team is pretty good. It's not about a specific position any more, it's about a specific talent level.
                        It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                          Originally posted by Lou Bega View Post
                          When it is all said & down Tyler will have a better career than Blake Griffen.
                          Now, I don't think Tyler will ever be a better player than Blake, but I do think it is possible he could have a better career when all is said and done.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                            Hansbrough is my favorite player on the team. I have no problem with him being the starting PF, but I would like a hybrid PF/C like Nene or Jefferson that we could slide to center if Hibbert is in foul trouble, needing a breather, or just having an off spurt.

                            If you can go from Nene/Hibbert to Hansbrough/Hibbert or Hansbrough/Nene, those are great options to have in my opinion

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: why does everyone want a new pf?

                              Divide 96 minutes at the 4/5 between Nene, Hansbrough, and Hibbert.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Dc is an off guard in a PGs body. You can't teach unselfishness

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X