2016-2017 Indiana Pacers season (and the rest of the NBA)

[2006Coltsbestever]

You know it's bad when Mark Jackson and Van Gundy are talking about brownies and eating them as well. 67-37 Warriors.

[oldunclemark]

46 minutes ago, MTC said:

Trade PG for Bradley, Smart, Crowder, and the 1st pick. 

We would have the worst offense in the NBA.

That trade will never happen

[oldunclemark]

9 minutes ago, Luck is Good said:

I'm of the mindset that the Pacers need to trade Paul George. You can't lose him for nothing. The last chance is to get Gordon Hayward. If the Pacers get him, that changes everything. And I agree about Lonzo Ball. I wouldn't have any part of him with my franchise. And he can thank his loud mouthed dad for that

There's no reason to do anything with Paul now.

We'll  draft and see who we can acquire in the off-season..

 

....If we add a quality forward..paul will probably resign with us for the max deal..

..We'd be insane to trade PG to Boston and have him whip us for the next 6 years..

They can ask all they want

 

 

[Colts_Fan12]

I really want Fultz but now the stupid Celtics will take him I wanted the Lakers to get the 1st so we could trade PG there for the 1st Ingram and Russel 

[BullsColtsFan1]

15 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

The only reason Shaq was unstoppable was a rule change adding the circle at the rim. If that rule had not been changed Shaq would have fouled out of 75% of every game he played in.

Shaq was just so much bigger and more physical then everyone else.  I agree with you though, he would have had a lot more fouls.  I still think Wilt, Kareem and Shaq are the 3 best Centers to ever play, it's hard for me not to put Hakeem up there as well. 

[BullsColtsFan1]

15 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Boston always had the best team money could buy back in those days.

They were stacked and there was only a limited amount of teams in the league at that time too.  Still had great HOF players though especially Russell and Cousy. 

[BullsColtsFan1]

9 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I really want Fultz but now the stupid Celtics will take him I wanted the Lakers to get the 1st so we could trade PG there for the 1st Ingram and Russel 

I don't think the Celtics will pick Fultz, I could be wrong though.  Here is my reasoning.  They have a solid starting back court of IT and Bradley.  IT and Fultz play the same position and Fultz isn't big enough to play the 2.  If the Celtics are smart they find a trade partner for that #1 pick.  A lot of the really good rookies won't even work out for Boston strictly because their team is already pretty set at every position, you can make an argument here and there.  I think a player like Tatum(Duke) or Jackson(Kansas) would fit that team the best but I don't think their #1 picks.  I think the Celtics will try to trade that pick and that Fultz and Ball will both be their at #2 if they happen to keep it.  I think the Lakers will draft Ball but I could be wrong, they might take Fultz.  If the Celtics keep that pick Fultz will still be available at 2 imo so the Pacers could potentially offer that deal.  I think they could get the #2 pick and Russell but I am not sure about Ingram as well. 

[Colts_Fan12]

10 minutes ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

I don't think the Celtics will pick Fultz, I could be wrong though.  Here is my reasoning.  They have a solid starting back court of IT and Bradley.  IT and Fultz play the same position and Fultz isn't big enough to play the 2.  If the Celtics are smart they find a trade partner for that #1 pick.  A lot of the really good rookies won't even work out for Boston strictly because their team is already pretty set at every position, you can make an argument here and there.  I think a player like Tatum(Duke) or Jackson(Kansas) would fit that team the best but I don't think their #1 picks.  I think the Celtics will try to trade that pick and that Fultz and Ball will both be their at #2 if they happen to keep it.  I think the Lakers will draft Ball but I could be wrong, they might take Fultz.  If the Celtics keep that pick Fultz will still be available at 2 imo so the Pacers could potentially offer that deal.  I think they could get the #2 pick and Russell but I am not sure about Ingram as well. 

Id take the pick plus Ingram and let them keep Russell honestly

[BullsColtsFan1]

17 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Id take the pick plus Ingram and let them keep Russell honestly

That'd be ideal for the Pacers, you could draft a point guard then keep Ingram to fill George's spot.  That'd be a good deal for both teams really.  Lakers would just keep Russell and get George, Pacers would get Ingram and draft Fultz. 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 hours ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

That'd be ideal for the Pacers, you could draft a point guard then keep Ingram to fill George's spot.  That'd be a good deal for both teams really.  Lakers would just keep Russell and get George, Pacers would get Ingram and draft Fultz. 

Chance to build our own big 3 with good development Fultz Ingram and Turner 

[MTC]

I know a lot of people hate Lavar Ball, but I find him extremely entertaining.

 

This was his reaction to the Lakers getting the 2nd pick: https://*/zux48

 

 

[dgambill]

If PG wants this team to get better he needs to leverage his stardom to get someone to come play with him. We can offer max contracts to stars all we want and they won't come unless PG can convince someone he can take the next step with them. Could he convince a Gordon Hayward to come home and be the Robin to his Batman? We could develop a pretty nice squad...re-sign Teague.

Teague, PG, Hayward, Young, and Turner. Light in rebounding but Hayward provides that long distance option and guy that can get his own shot when PG sits down. You'd have the Lance/Seraphin combo on the bench with GRIII and Ellis. I think we would have to try to trade away Al or option him and renounce CJ to afford Gordon so we would need to use our pick to find some rebounding help or maybe a 3pt option but that's a team that could compete for a top 2/3 seed and give the Boston's/Clevelands a run in the East. Otherwise I don't see the point of keeping PG. Without putting another elite player next to him there is no way they can overcome Cleveland and a team like Boston that is only going to get better year in and year out with all the draft talent they have we won't have the fire power to compete against the elite teams. To me its easier to add some bangers and 3pt specialist then to find all around players to complement the team. I just don't know who out there is good enough that we could logically get. We have to leverage the super star we have and the fact that Gordon could come home to play. I also think being the second option is appealing to him as well....not having the pressure of carrying a team. I think its a more natural role for him. I know Boston is the odds on favorite to land him outside of Utah but this is a star that we actually have a chance in FA to get. It's the only way I think we can avoid a rebuild...otherwise we have to find a way to move PG...I don't see a free agent out there that would want to come play here otherwise and that could give us contender status.

[crazycolt1]

5 hours ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

Shaq was just so much bigger and more physical then everyone else.  I agree with you though, he would have had a lot more fouls.  I still think Wilt, Kareem and Shaq are the 3 best Centers to ever play, it's hard for me not to put Hakeem up there as well. 

By the NBA adding the circle at the rim it has made big men dominate the rim and good defenders a thing of the past. I liked it better when defense was part of the game.

[BullsColtsFan1]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

By the NBA adding the circle at the rim it has made big men dominate the rim and good defenders a thing of the past. I liked it better when defense was part of the game.

I agree with you.  80's and 90's defense was very much part of the game and that's when the NBA was at its best.

[chad72]

2 hours ago, MTC said:

I know a lot of people hate Lavar Ball, but I find him extremely entertaining.

 

This was his reaction to the Lakers getting the 2nd pick: https://*/zux48

 

 

 

Yeah, that guy thinks he is marketable but he is not, in this current world. He pulls a "Big Baller brand ain't for woman's clothing" quote, then asking The Herd co-host to "stay in her lane"? This guy has serious issues.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/lavar-ball-tells-fs1-host-stay-lane-testy-interview-190733413.html

 

The faster Lonzo Ball chalks out his own life without LaVar Ball, the better it is for the young man for his future. Sometimes, you have to make the hard choice with family and entourage that gets in the way of your future, no matter how badly that family and entourage "think they are good for you". 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

By the NBA adding the circle at the rim it has made big men dominate the rim and good defenders a thing of the past. I liked it better when defense was part of the game.

Shaq is actually the last great pure Center we have had that loved playing strictly inside, Howard has fizzled out and most Centers/PF's want to shoot 3's now days. I agree with BullsColts, my Top 3 Centers are Kareem, Wilt, and Shaq regarding pure Centers. Bill Russell was 6'10 at best, some have him listed at 6'9 225. He is really PF size.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Shaq is actually the last great pure Center we have had that loved playing strictly inside, Howard has fizzled out and most Centers/PF's want to shoot 3's now days. I agree with BullsColts, my Top 3 Centers are Kareem, Wilt, and Shaq regarding pure Centers. Bill Russell was 6'10 at best, some have him listed at 6'9 225. He is really PF size.

While I agree that Shaq was a great center how great would he have been had the NBA let other centers play defense on him and also changed the rules so that Shaq wouldn't foul out of games with his never ending charges? That is why the NBA decided to make the circle at the basket so charges wouldn't be called. Shaq was a fan fav and him sitting on the bench wouldn't have fit the narrative of the NBA at the time.

[Chrisaaron1023]

4 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

By the NBA adding the circle at the rim it has made big men dominate the rim and good defenders a thing of the past. I liked it better when defense was part of the game.

I'm not understanding this.. how does this stop defenders?

 

p.s. this just happened in the 90's??

[Chrisaaron1023]

Lol Thompson HAS to lead the league in Offensive boards.. geeze..

[dgambill]

24 minutes ago, Chrisaaron1023 said:

Lol Thompson HAS to lead the league in Offensive boards.. geeze..

East has a bunch of pansies. Nobody to check him. Honestly if your Danny Ainge and your watching your team get man-handled by Thompson and Lebron how do you not trade the number 1 pick + for either Butler or PG? Do they really think adding a rookie guard is going to get them past Cleveland the next 3 years? Lebron isn't going anywhere. He will be dominate for another 3-5 years....Celtics are the recent Pacers. Bridesmaids but never a bride if they don't land a legit stud. Isaiah is really good...Al is solid but they don't have a take over the game stud to carry them. They need a dog like Jimmy or a guy that can light it up and still play d like PG. I think they trade for Jimmy in the offseason and PG makes it to LA. Everyone but us wants to see that. But how do you watch and not see that the Celtics are like Lebrons little brother...going to beat him up and do as he likes for the next several years.

[oldunclemark]

48-25...I hope Boston has a 'Plan B'

..They cant try to go 'big with Cleveland, can they?

...and their 'small' team doesnt match up so far

[oldunclemark]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

While I agree that Shaq was a great center how great would he have been had the NBA let other centers play defense on him and also changed the rules so that Shaq wouldn't foul out of games with his never ending charges? That is why the NBA decided to make the circle at the basket so charges wouldn't be called. Shaq was a fan fav and him sitting on the bench wouldn't have fit the narrative of the NBA at the time.

Shaq got fouled repeatedly..and defenders flopped a lot..

Shaq cold move you without pushing you.

......The NBA didn't change any rules for big players..they just allowed Shaq to turn around

By ther way..the circle around the basket has nothing to do with big men....its folks stepping in front of players on the drive..

Shaq didn't drive much..He just turned and shot

 

[oldunclemark]

6 hours ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

I agree with you.  80's and 90's defense was very much part of the game and that's when the NBA was at its best.

I liked hand checking ....its still allowed in the lane..

...Hard to watch touch fouls..

 

Defense  in the 80s and 90s made you play. Running to the corner or stepping back for a 3...isn't very watchable to me

[oldunclemark]

anybody see Paul George on with Jimmy Kimmell Monday...pretty funny.

I'm seeing he is under a touch of pressure to come 'home ala LBJ and D-Wade.

 

..But there is the matter of about $70 mil

[Bluefire4]

58 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

anybody see Paul George on with Jimmy Kimmell Monday...pretty funny.

I'm seeing he is under a touch of pressure to come 'home ala LBJ and D-Wade.

 

..But there is the matter of about $70 mil

He doesn't have any pressure to go home. It's his fault for telling everybody that would listen that he wanted to. That was his choice.

[dgambill]

Any chance that if we were to get the second pick of the lakers we could trade it and our middle first rd to Sacramento for the 5th and 10th pick? If say they threw Ingram in with the number one then we could have the makings of a decent young nucleus to surround Turner with. Who knows maybe a Fox/j Jackson and then come back with a big like Collins/Markkanen/Patton type to put alongside Turner. They could then maybe let Teague walk and sign a JJ Reddick type and let Fox run the point or keep Teague and bring in Jackson to replace PG or who knows if they could still convince Hayward to come home those two picks with Turner and Hayward would fit nicely. Depending on who LA threw in the deal to get PG we could have a decent starting 5 even without Hayward. Young and up and coming and maybe peak right after Lebron leaves. Just wondering if Sacramento loved someone so much to move up to 2 they would give up 10 to slide back to 18. Perhaps keep Ball in California maybe? Logical not but who knows.

[oldunclemark]

33 minutes ago, Bluefire4 said:

He doesn't have any pressure to go home. It's his fault for telling everybody that would listen that he wanted to. That was his choice.

He has pressure to answer the questions......whether he brought it on himself or not..

...He's under contract.....Folks are asking him if hes going to do something he cant do right now

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

48-25...I hope Boston has a 'Plan B'

..They cant try to go 'big with Cleveland, can they?

...and their 'small' team doesnt match up so far

Unfortunately there is no Plan B LOL. These NBA Playoffs have been among the most boring I have maybe ever seen. I do think the Finals however will have tons of twists and turns. Both the Warriors and Cavs want the Championship badly and both have loaded lineups. A lot of legacy's on the line as well regarding can Durant finally win a Ring, can Steph finally win a Finals MVP, can LeBron win his 4th Championship and avoid going 3-5 in Finals? The Finals will be loaded with Stars, Warriors have Curry, Durant, Thompson, and Green/Cavs have LeBron, Irving, Love, and Korver. Usually not having HCA doesn't matter to LeBron but if it comes down to Game 7 again, they may be the difference this year unlike last year.

[oldunclemark]

10 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Any chance that if we were to get the second pick of the lakers we could trade it and our middle first rd to Sacramento for the 5th and 10th pick? If say they threw Ingram in with the number one then we could have the makings of a decent young nucleus to surround Turner with. Who knows maybe a Fox/j Jackson and then come back with a big like Collins/Markkanen/Patton type to put alongside Turner. They could then maybe let Teague walk and sign a JJ Reddick type and let Fox run the point or keep Teague and bring in Jackson to replace PG or who knows if they could still convince Hayward to come home those two picks with Turner and Hayward would fit nicely. Just wondering if Sacramento loved someone so much to move up to 2 they would give up 10 to slide back to 18. Perhaps keep Ball in California maybe? Logical not but who knows.

Why don't we just sign Teague, Brooke Lopez and JJ Reddick, and try to win..

.....instead of building a decent nucleus

Edited May 18, 2017 by oldunclemark
spell

[oldunclemark]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Unfortunately there is no Plan B LOL. These NBA Playoffs have been among the most boring I have maybe ever seen. I do think the Finals however will have tons of twists and turns. Both the Warriors and Cavs want the Championship badly and both have loaded lineups. A lot of legacy's on the line as well regarding can Durant finally win a Ring, can Steph finally win a Finals MVP, can LeBron win his 4th Championship and avoid going 3-5 in Finals? The Finals will be loaded with Stars, Warriors have Curry, Durant, Thompson, and Green/Cavs have LeBron, Irving, Love, and Korver. Usually not having HCA doesn't matter to LeBron but if it comes down to Game 7 again, they may be the difference this year unlike last year.

117-104 final....Boston tried bully ball late and there aren't very good at that either..

 

Loos like you're going to get the finals you want....I admit I have difficulty caring whether GSW or Cleveland wins...maybe I'll root for the refs

...its been a very disappointing playoff so far

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

117-104 final....Boston tried bully ball late and there aren't very good at that either..

 

Loos like you're going to get the finals you want....I admit I have difficulty caring whether GSW or Cleveland wins

...its been a very disappointing playoff so far

That is the Finals I picked before the season, not necessarily the Finals I wanted. I just figured it would happen.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Hell Tristan Thompson is so underrated, he had 20 Points and 9 Rebounds. Love had 32. Cavs probably could've won this game without LeBron. What a butt kicking!

[oldunclemark]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is the Finals I picked before the season, not necessarily the Finals I wanted. I just figured it would happen.

Its not the finals I want to see.....and if GSW sweeps the Cavs, this becomes the worst NBA playoffs in my lifetime

[oldunclemark]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Hell Tristan Thompson is so underrated, he had 20 Points and 9 Rebounds. Love had 32. Cavs probably could've won this game without LeBron. What a butt kicking!

Thompson wasn't playing against a real center tonight....

..Boston isn't very good..they are 8-7 in the layoffs with 2 losses to the Bulls

 

....I hope those who wanted to trade PG for 3 role Celtic players saw why Boston would kill to make that trade

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, oldunclemark said:

Its not the finals I want to see.....and if GSW sweeps the Cavs, this becomes the worst NBA playoffs in my lifetime

They wont sweep the Cavs. No way LeBron gets swept. The Cavs have other Very Good to Great players as well. It will at least go 6 and I am starting to think it will go 7 with the way the Cavs are playing.

[oldunclemark]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They wont sweep the Cavs. No way LeBron gets swept. The Cavs have other Very Good to Great players as well. It will at least go 6 and I am starting to think it will go 7 with the way the Cavs are playing.

..I hope you are right but so far....the truth is: the Indiana Pacers have put up the biggest fight against Cleveland..

.....and we aren't that good

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

..I hope you are right but so far....the truth is: the Indiana Pacers have put up the biggest fight against Cleveland..

.....and we aren't that good

I would want the Warriors to win and do think they are better than the Cavs but the Cavs beat them last season. The LeBron factor is huge. If the Cavs are making 3's at a high rate anything can happen actually.

[oldunclemark]

By the way...Paul George will be or not be an all-NBA (top-15) Player as of Thursday..

 

...Whether Gordon Hayward is all-NBA also may be significant

[Colts_Fan12]

59 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Any chance that if we were to get the second pick of the lakers we could trade it and our middle first rd to Sacramento for the 5th and 10th pick? If say they threw Ingram in with the number one then we could have the makings of a decent young nucleus to surround Turner with. Who knows maybe a Fox/j Jackson and then come back with a big like Collins/Markkanen/Patton type to put alongside Turner. They could then maybe let Teague walk and sign a JJ Reddick type and let Fox run the point or keep Teague and bring in Jackson to replace PG or who knows if they could still convince Hayward to come home those two picks with Turner and Hayward would fit nicely. Depending on who LA threw in the deal to get PG we could have a decent starting 5 even without Hayward. Young and up and coming and maybe peak right after Lebron leaves. Just wondering if Sacramento loved someone so much to move up to 2 they would give up 10 to slide back to 18. Perhaps keep Ball in California maybe? Logical not but who knows.

Just keep the second pick if the Celtics don't take Fultz pick him have him Ingram and Turner much better young team

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

Shaq got fouled repeatedly..and defenders flopped a lot..

Shaq cold move you without pushing you.

......The NBA didn't change any rules for big players..they just allowed Shaq to turn around

By ther way..the circle around the basket has nothing to do with big men....its folks stepping in front of players on the drive..

Shaq didn't drive much..He just turned and shot

 

It effected the charge rules completely. Take a look at Shaq's numbers before and after the rule change.

The rules name is even called the charge circle.

If you look at the rule itself it says nothing about players stepping in front of another player.

According to the NBA it said the rule was changed to make the game safer, more fair and easier to referee.

What the rule change really did was give players like Shaq a free rein under the basket without anyone being able to play defense on them.