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

Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

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

  • Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

    First off in news I no longer care about the Boston Celtics defeated the Philadelphia 76ers to move on to the Eastern Conference finals against the Heat.

    Now that we have that bit of nauseating news out of the way let us move on to the second part of our look back of the season that was.

    In all honesty I could probably just do the entire post based on the first person we are going to review because I have a feeling that the responses to him are going to be both mixed and vast. I am pretty confident that my review will leave some of his fans less than thrilled with me.

    Paul George:

    See if this sounds familiar, this is from draft express in their review of Paul.

    The first thing that pops off the page when looking at George’s numbers is his high turnover percentage. The Fresno State product coughed the ball up on some 18.8% of his total possessions. He seldom gave the ball up in spot up situations, as he often just took the first available shot, but he turned the ball over on 30% of his one-on-one opportunities and 25% of his transition touches. Obviously, his ball-handling ability will be something that he needs to refine in order to reach his potential as a player.
    From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz1w2yQGYzg
    http://www.draftexpress.com

    Has much about this changed in his two seasons in the NBA? Obviously being our young player with a very high athletic ceiling and talent has given him tons of benefit of the doubt points and he will still be given plenty more, even by me.

    But at the point in time I think it’s time that some of us step back from the ledge and evaluate really how good this guy is and how good he is going to be.

    The talent is there, that is not in question. The work ethic seems good, since the day he was drafted I’ve read his tweets and read articles about him going to train and where he was on this day or that day playing with this player or that player. So I don’t think he has a lack of drive or desire to get better. But there is something that is keeping him from taking that next step or at least there was something keeping him back this season from taking that next step.

    This is the part where his fans are going to claim that “thing” in his way is Danny Granger and while that may be true to some extent I wonder how much if any of it is true.

    My thinking on him now is that he will be a good to great player in the NBA for many years to come but I have kind of backed away from the thought that he is going to be a special player. When I say special I mean one of the top tier talents in the NBA. If I were to take a guess at where his ceiling will lie I would say Rudy Gay, Danny Granger, Joe Johnson level of player. There is nothing wrong with that btw, in fact that is the second tier of talent in the NBA and I would be thrilled with that. But because of his athletic ability and sometime his silky smooth moves I fall into the trap of thinking “wow we may have actually drafted that one special type player we have never had before”.

    Let’s look at what he can do first of all. I don’t think he will be an elite level defender in the future because I believe he is an elite level defender right now. He has to work on fighting through screens and such but other than that he is by far the best perimeter defender we have and have had in a long time. I just laugh every single time I read someone say his natural position is small forward because what makes him special at the two guard spot on defense would just make him an above average defender at the three spot. Some day he might need to move to the three but as long as he is young and has the speed and the legs for it he is at his best when pestering the oppositions best perimeter player.

    Don’t let his struggles against Wade the past few games fool you, his defense was for the most part fine its just that Wade was hitting everything he threw up and on top of that guess what, Dwayne Wade is one of the best freaking players in the world so it’s no ill reflection on Paul that he scored points.

    He has great lateral quickness, he has tremendous leaping ability, and he has great timing and recovery. Also here is the main thing, he has a superb instinct for where the ball is going to go so he can play the passing lanes like few player can and I am going to go ahead and compare him to Pippen when he is playing the lanes (don’t get me wrong I’m not saying he is as good as Scottie). Also the one huge advantage he has that some people confuse for a disadvantage is his size. Yes he is tall, yes he is also long but this guy is not some leviathan lumbering around the floor. He is panther quick so he can alter shots, play the passing lanes and be a real force on the back board all at the same time.

    That is his second great attribute. He rebounds very well for a guard. He has an instinct for it and when he is grabbing double figures on the glass more often than not we are winning.

    On offense he has some moves but this is where we are going to start to have trouble.

    He has a smooth jump shot and has a very long range from where he can be affective. I don’t believe he has Danny’s range yet and he may never but he is pretty close. He also has some decent moves going to the basket although he has an absolute maddening habit of throwing up some super cool swooping scoop shot that sometimes goes in and looks spectacular and other times is pounded off of the glass by the opposition making me generally cuss as though I have turrets syndrome.

    His passing is also a mixed bag of nuts and sadly there are very few almond and cashews in there. I think the worst case scenario presented itself where he was leading a 3 on 1 fast break and decided that the best thing he could do was do a one handed (underhanded at that) pass directly to Shane Battier, the problem with this is that Battier was a member of the Heat.

    This goes directly to a huge problem I have with Paul and this is where his fans are going to get upset with me. I like to call this the “too cool for school” attitude that Paul often displays on the court.

    I think part of his swooping scoop shots and his one handed passes are part of a problem of Paul trying to look cool and above it all when he plays. Where some would think that slamming home a dunk is showing off in Paul’s case he knows he can dunk so to him getting up this acrobatic shots is more of what he likes to do when he could easily just go lay it up at the rim or slam it home. This drives me crazy when he does it but I have a feeling that his fans like that type of stuff as much as he does.

    I know that this is part of him being young so I’m hoping he will grow out of it. But my God did he **** off some of the vets during that last game. David West barked at him for about a solid min. after a blown play, which I’ve not seen West do before.

    Now let’s just go ahead and address the elephant in the room.

    Is Danny Granger standing in his way? First before we all just scoff at the idea I will say we have seen it done before and oddly enough the player who was having it done to them was Danny Granger. For the first few years of Danny Grangers career he deferred to an older veteran who honestly was stunting his growth and that player was Jermaine O’Neal.

    So I won’t just dismiss the idea out of hand for that reason and that reason alone.

    But there are also very significant differences between Jermaine & Danny vs. Danny & Paul.

    First and foremost Danny Granger has shown that he is more than willing to step back and share the offensive load and not have the entire offense be focused on him. Sure he struggled initially with it but even his biggest critics have to admit that he did not force himself into the center of the offense. Jermaine adamantly refused to not be the focus of the offense and one of the little known secrets about him demanding to be traded was that he was not happy with O’Brien’s offense and it’s de-emphasis on low post play. Obviously nobody agrees with Jim’s coaching but Jermaine had long been past his ability to be efficient in the post.

    Secondly Danny & Paul compliment each other quite well on the defensive end. While Paul is superb at guarding quick perimeter players often times bigger wing player can over power him and he can not keep them from getting what they want. Danny on the other hand lacks quickness but other than for a very few small forwards in the NBA he is stronger than most of them.

    Paul has been given several opportunities to assume a larger role on the offense when Danny has been injured or limited by fouls and not once has he really stepped up to take the role he was given.

    In fact I think it’s safe to say that he actually had a very disappointing first round of the playoffs and only a good second round.

    What concerns me the most about Paul is this and there is no stat to back this up nor is there any real logical way to explain what I am talking about other than to just say it.

    Paul is not a killer. I don’t think it is something you can learn or train for and frankly very few players have it. Extreme cases of this are Jordan, Bryant, Barkley and even Reggie Miller. These are the guys who not only don’t shy away from the big moment they run at it and demand to be in the center of it. I contend that while he is nowhere near the talent level of the above named players I think Danny Granger is a killer and it’s just in him, not something he learned.

    Big moments of the game Paul so far has tended to shrink and there are times that he treats the ball like a hand grenade with the pin pulled trying to get it out of his hands as fast as he can when the game is on the line.

    Now like I said I can’t back that up other than just by anecdotal evidence so if you disagree with me that is fine, I’m not claiming to be 100% correct there. It’s just something I feel.

    Now comes the part that will really **** off people. It has been said over & over that we should trade Danny Granger to try & get Eric Gordon. This is often said so that Eric can come home and Paul can move to his natural position of small forward (which I think is b.s. btw).

    Well first I don’t agree with getting Gordon unless it is super cheap as a free agent because his knees have not shown the ability to stay healthy. But if there is this absolute need to make this trade to “bring him home” then let me be the first to throw this out there.

    Paul George & filler for Eric Gordon. Now remember I am already on record as saying I wouldn’t do any trade for him, but I’m turning the tables on the Paul George fan club here with this and here is why.

    Right now I am not convinced that Paul will ever be as good as Danny is and Danny is in his prime right now and still have probably a good 3 years left of being at the top of his game. If we want to win right now and stop waiting on development and such then why wouldn’t it make more sense to keep your best player and just add another great player with him instead of trading away your best player in hopes that another player eventually becomes as good as he is?

    Yes I know that is a totally outlandish idea to many of you and I have probably derailed this whole thread with that thought and I’m sure I am about to get the whole “he will be growing for many years to come” routines. I don’t disagree with any of that. I’m just saying that if we are looking to make a move and do it to win right now not 3 years from now then this might make more sense.

    Before you hang me remember I said I would much rather just keep Danny & Paul together because unlike some of you I do not believe that they do anything but compliment each other.

    Ok that’s probably enough about Paul and should generate discussion for a good while.

    Predictions: He will be the starting two guard next year and for several years to come and he will eventually take his place on the 3rd and maybe even 2nd team all defensive players.

    What I would like to see: Learn to dribble and stop being lazy with the ball.

    Will he be an all-star? Not next year but in the future maybe.

    George Hill:

    Not really sure at the end of the day what his role should be. Honestly he is one of those true hybrid guards who is not really a point guard nor really a shooting guard. He’s a little of both and while that has its advantages it also can be a detriment as well.

    Our team struggles to score, some of that is on the point guard but most of it is on the offensive scheme and the type of players we have. While I love Frank we still have the very bad habit of having players not move without the ball and there are very few cutters so frankly you could have Steve Nash running our offense and at the end of the day he would still get a good number of assists but not nearly like he does now.

    So while I will say that George is not a natural passer or point guard I will also point out that our system is mostly the problem.

    Overall he took a step backwards in field goal % which seemed to be a common theme on our team this year. He was down across the board in field goal, three point shooting and free throw shooting.

    Some of that could be because he was adjusting to a new team and a new way of doing things. Not sure how or why that should affect his free throw shooting though.

    Obviously the team responded very well with him being the starting point guard but I think we have to look at some of those games and wonder if we weren’t playing against teams that were shutting down for the year or missing their primary point guard (the Cavs. come immediately to mind here).

    But that is not to say that the team wouldn’t have responded very well to him in either case.

    Defensively he is far better at guarding the pick and roll than Darren is. He can fight through a pick and even when he can’t he recovers faster, not because he is quicker than Darren but because he has Inspector Gadget type extension arms.

    This is so very important because while Collison has good things he does as a guard the problem is he is hideous at guarding the pick and roll which causes a cascading affect of defensive lapses that usually ends up with Danny Grangers man getting an open shot right at the basket because Danny had to rotate away to cover the middle because David West was to slow and Roy was to far away and no one got back to help on his man. This all happens because Roy has to go so far out to help Darren.

    This stopped happening when Hill entered.

    With Hill in the game along side Danny & Paul we actually have quite a buzz saw for defender to try and go through often times with them having to climb Mt. Hibbert usually unsuccessfully.

    But just like Paul George the offensive end can sometimes be an adventure when George is out there. He is at best an average passer for a point guard and he certainly is miles away from being elite there. He is a decent shooter and can at times hit big huge three point shots. He is also very good at getting to the basket.

    But then there are times that he will miss a wide open layup.

    I just honestly don’t know what to think here. I like him with the starters and if it is between him and Collison I would prefer George to start. But if there were an elite level point guard out there I would have no problem at all with George going back to being the first combo guard off of the bench.

    Now this is where it gets tricky. He’s good but how good is he? How much money do we want to sink into a player who plays the position that most national pundits say we need an upgrade at?

    Also there is the question of how much money do you give him vs. just letting Darren Collison play the point?

    My thoughts on that are this. If by some miracle we manage to get a Deron Williams (not going to happen but just go with it here) then I would have zero problem letting him walk. If he decides that he is worth 10 million a year I would have zero problem letting him walk and good luck to him in trying to get anyone to sign him to that.

    But if we don’t sign him and we don’t upgrade the position I will go ahead and say this now. That trade with San Antonio was a disaster. If he comes back and plays, even as a backup, then I think it was a good trade for both teams.

    But if Hill is just a one year rental and we don’t upgrade above Collison, then no that trade will go down as one of the worst trades we have pulled and the worst of the Bird era.

    Predictions: I think we re-sign him to around 6 million a year, he won’t be happy with that but he won’t get a better offer in this market. He will be the starter next season.

    What I would like to see: Improve his court vision and work diligently in trying to make us no longer the worst fast breaking team in basketball

    Will he be an all-star? No

    Ok that’s it for the starters. I think this will give us something to talk about and I will start working on the bench either tomorrow or the next day.

    In keeping with our theme of beautiful music I present you with what I consider the most beautiful song ever written.

    Theology/Civilization by Basil Polidaris



    Also here is a kick @ss version of this song on acoustic guitar



    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    I just laugh every single time I read someone say his natural position is small forward because what makes him special at the two guard spot on defense would just make him an above average defender at the three spot.
    *sigh*

    There's two sides of the floor Peck...

    edit: Here's a list of things Paul did better than Danny this year: TS%, eFG%, FG%, 3pt%, he had more assists, rebounds, steals, and he did all this in less minutes. Hell, he may already be the better player. The kid averaged 15-7-3 per 36 while playing All-NBA type defense at 21... and if you had to choose you'd rather trade him and keep Danny?

    I was frustrated with Paul at times this year too, but let's not forget that this would have been his senior year. He's got a lot of room to grow and I still believe he's gonna be a beast in this league.
    Last edited by CJ Jones; 05-27-2012, 08:47 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

      Would be willing to trade George in a really good deal, but don't think Gordon's the guy. Like his game, scared to death of the injuries. So that goes for trading just about any of the core for the guy.

      PG could improve some of those offensive deficiencies, but I'm not sure he even makes it to Granger level offensively. Definitely hope he doesn't make it there in FG%! Someplace else somebody brought up there's a touch of Derrick McKey in his game/attitude. I can kind of see that, so maybe we need to be ready to accept PG will hang his hat on D and give moderate scoring support at best.

      George Hill is a good player who I think helped us a lot, but his best position if first (combo) guard off the bench. He would be extremely valuable in that role with his versatility/talents. However, it requires we bring in one and possible two superior guards to start. Get the sense he's a good chemistry guy. Would love to keep him around if price is right and it fits with whatever other moves we might make.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

        Remember, this IS Indiana. 22 turnovers/game will not be tolerated beyond 3 games into next season, 5 max. You saw all of those filled seats at the Fieldhouse, expect them to be empty again if the sloppy lazy passing game continues. Either some major growth or an upgrade will be required to keep butts in those seats.

        Good job as always Peck...once again I cannot dispute a thing you say, although I am not as sold on DG in the "assassin" role as you are, he is most likely the closest thing we have to one on this team.
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

          Good post Peck, I agree that nobody, PG included, should be off the table in trade discussions, and I also hope both he and Danny stay here for a long time.
          As you said George needs to work on his ball handling, but also really needs to learn how to become aggressive on the court, even though it's not in his nature. Danny did it, Roy also seems to be improving in that department, and I think PG will get there too. I think he has the ability to become a top 2nd tier player in the league, and that's is fine by me. I never expected him to become an automatic All Star selection along with Durant, James, Rose etc. but if he manages to become a Rudy Gay kind of player on the offensive end, while maintaining his defensive strengths I'd be really pleased.

          Our team's biggest problem is that we have no good passers. None. Roy is probably the best passer for his position on the team, which is not good. Adding a good passing PG would instantly make everyone else better, and more efficient on offense.

          If Hill eventually walks in the summer, it would be a very disappointing outcome to the trade, but hindsight is always 20/20, and at the time of the trade, it seemed like a smart move for both us and the Spurs (although when making deals with San Antonio there's always one winner ). Not all smart trades work out eventually but I wouldn't hold it against Bird because the logic behind the deal was sound at the time, and that's all I can ask of him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

            its hard telling if george has that killer instinct, i just think he doesn't trust his ball handling yet. he's stepped up to the challenge defensively this year and last year against the bulls. if he doesn't have that killer instinct he should be training w/ kobe bryant during the offseason. he also needs to get stronger so he can finish in traffic


            i think george hill can be the starting point guard if it's in a triangle offense.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

              well i think george, west, and hibbert all pretty good passers although george has thrown some lazy ones. they won't wow you, but i think they're above average for their position. hill, collison, and granger leave a lot to be desired though

              edit: i think stephenson has the best court vision and passing on the team though

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                Peck, through the years, I'd say we see eye-to-eye on most things. On your opinions of George and Hill, we agree 99%.

                The only change that I would make is to make an even stronger statement of "Granger is not limiting George's growth in any way".

                To those that think Granger is limiting George, I would say bull-f'n-****. The only thing that is limiting George is George himself. He could play SF, but in agreeing with you, my opinion is that he would not be able to play it anywhere near the level that Granger does. He brings qualities to the SG position that no other team has and should seek his growth at that position. If successful, he would be able to provide the Pacers with a tremendous advantage over almost every other team.

                The biggest things holding George back are his ball-handling skills and his strength. Those that think he should be our SF deep down have to realize that a majority of other starting SFs would significantly overpower Paul George. Either that, or we are not watching the same games apparently. Before I would even consider more time for George at SF against prime-time SFs, I would expect him to add 10-15 pounds of muscle. But even then, there is nothing to distinguish George at SF unless he also significantly improved his ball-handling skills.

                George does not need to spend his off-season shooting 500-600 jump shots per day. If that's all he did, it would be a total waste of time. Instead, he should spend his time improving his ball-handling skills by going against players like George Hill, with a couple rules in effect. He must shoot all shots from 15 feet or closer and he is not allowed to just back his man down inside of 15-18 feet. He needs to learn to make skilled basketball moves with the ball to get himself open for good mid-range looks and to also consistently get to the rim without losing the ball.

                I think Paul George can still become something very special. But I think his only opportunity of reaching that level is at SG, not at SF.

                As for Hill, I hope that he is not our starting SG next year. I hope we have a new starter that we acquire and that Hill is the first guard off the bench. I believe with better care of the ball and a PG that could have better and more often delivered the ball to Hibbert and West we could have beaten Miami. But, I also worry about how much we need to pay a player that is better suited to be the first guard off the bench. We certainly should not pay him the "greater than 7M" that he is seeking. But how much is the right amount? I'm hoping somewhere around 5M.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                  Paul George himself said coming into the league that he is a 3, but that he is willing to play the two if that is what his team needs. I agree with Paul.

                  Interesting that Paul George is frequently the chosen defender against small forwards, including those who are able to play the 4. This is due to his length, quickness, and leaping ability which makes him able to defend those players at an elite level.

                  Also on offense, one of Paul's glaring weaknesses would be reduced somewhat as a 3, which is the requirement of being a primary slasher within the offense. As a 2, he is being guarded initially by players who are quicker 2's, after which he is more vulnerable to being stripped by sagging defenses than he would be as a 3.

                  Having a passing point guard, with an expensive Hill or his equivalent at the 2 (I really think Hill leaves and goes back to the Spurs this offseason for less money than he might have made here because the Pacers will use the extra to keep Hibbert) would allow Paul to relearn what I believe to be his natural position, the 3.

                  What about Granger, then? Granger has peaked. He has lost some lateral quickness, lift, and explosiveness due to his permanent torn plantar fascia issue. He has learned some "old man" game, as has been pointed out by others elsewhere on occasion, and will continue to modify that and increase his efficiency. Why not go ahead and trade him while his value is near its peak? Such a trade could go a long way toward securing a passing point guard or a younger, more powerful post presence to complement Hibbert. Who knows, with enough pieces besides Granger the Pacers may even be able to talk Orlando into trading Howard to us so that we can have the "Twin Towers of the New Millenium"?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                    I agree with you on Paul George. He is still young and will improve, no question about it. But I don't think "superstar" is in the cards. He is versitile, can play the 2 or 3 and in time will be a better ball handler and shooter. He is already a very good defender.

                    Guys that remind me of Paul in the league are Demar DeRozan and Andre Igoduala. I think he fits in this mold more that a 20 PPG scorer in the future. Fwiw, if he turned into Iggy I would personally be thrilled.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                      I've started to think he's like Iggy as well. A guy that could score, yet they just can't figure out what to do. I mean it really is that easy for him to get past people, and he take little 10 foot runners and jump shots like Durant does all day long. But, he just hasn't figured that out. We'll see of course. He can always change. Roy did. So we'll see, but I won't hold my breath waiting for a guy to turn into a scorer, especially when he already has all the tools. I mean he definitely needs to improve his ball handling, but still he could have easily scored more points all season and during the post season.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                        Well first I don’t agree with getting Gordon unless it is super cheap as a free agent because his knees have not shown the ability to stay healthy. But if there is this absolute need to make this trade to “bring him home” then let me be the first to throw this out there.

                        Paul George & filler for Eric Gordon. Now remember I am already on record as saying I wouldn’t do any trade for him, but I’m turning the tables on the Paul George fan club here with this and here is why.
                        Well lets be clear here, you are the 2nd person to throw that out there. But i'm glad great minds think alike.

                        I would just add that I think the move makes lot of sense based off what the Pacers are currently looking for in a guard, which I just don't thin George will ever be. He is afterall Tayshaun Prince 2.0.
                        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          Defensively he is far better at guarding the pick and roll than Darren is. He can fight through a pick and even when he can’t he recovers faster, not because he is quicker than Darren but because he has Inspector Gadget type extension arms.
                          So we're going to completely ignore series with the Magic when Hill was destroyed by Nelson?
                          You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                            Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                            The biggest things holding George back are his ball-handling skills and his strength. Those that think he should be our SF deep down have to realize that a majority of other starting SFs would significantly overpower Paul George. Either that, or we are not watching the same games apparently. Before I would even consider more time for George at SF against prime-time SFs, I would expect him to add 10-15 pounds of muscle. But even then, there is nothing to distinguish George at SF unless he also significantly improved his ball-handling skills.
                            I've heard this since I joined PD, and every time I see it I ask the same question and never get a response... please, will you put a name to those SFs that will significantly overpower Paul George? How many times did LeBron overpower Paul in the post season? How about Carmello in the regular season? He clearly needs to gain weight, which he obviously will, but the idea that Paul is too weak to play SF is a myth around here. He'd play elite level defense regardless of which position he plays.

                            Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                            So we're going to completely ignore series with the Magic when Hill was destroyed by Nelson?
                            No, but we can't completely ignore the rest of the season either. Hill was easily our best defender against PGs this year.
                            Last edited by CJ Jones; 05-27-2012, 06:23 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: 2011-12 player review and other fun stuff part 2

                              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                              I've heard this since I joined PD, and every time I see it I ask the same question and never get a response... please, will you put a name to those SFs that will significantly overpower Paul George? How many times did LeBron overpower Paul in the post season? How about Carmello in the regular season? He clearly needs to gain weight, which he obviously will, but the idea that Paul is too weak to play SF is a myth around here. He'd play elite level defense regardless of which position he plays.

                              .
                              Gay, Durant, 'Melo, LBJ, Pierce just to name a few.

                              Anywho, cognitive dissonance.... If Paul George's dribbling skills and lack of slashing are making him a SF, than we all have to agree Reggie Miller's best position was SF. Tall lanky spot up shooters who can't dribble obviously belong at SF...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X