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

J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

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

  • J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

    Let me start with the Miami Heat.

    The Heat do a great job, better than any team I have seen all season, at trapping the pick and roll and rotating out of that trap, often cutting off the two easiest passes. They also double team very hard and yet they appear to never leave anyone open. It seemed like they had 6 defenders. Very, very well coached team. Looks like a Pat Riley coached team to me, a lot of credit needs to go to Stan Van Gundy. They have a lot of very athletic guys, so that makes their defense tough.

    On to the Pacers, I know many of you will say the Pacers did not play well, I disagree, the Heat's defense will make you look bad.

    Was that the best terrible game you have ever seen a player play. I am talking about Ron Artest. He had 6 steals, several other deflections that lead to steals, and he got the whole Heat team into foul trouble. The terrible part were the turnovers and missed shots, but he got two huge steals in the last 2 minutes and the two biggest rebs of the game.

    Even Ronnie's "bad" games are great

    J.O. was key, he hit big shot after big shot in the second half and also had a few huge blocked shots.

    Rick Carlisle was fuming mad at Tinsley for that home run pass late in the game, you don't see Rick get mad at individual players too often, does anyone who was at the game know what Rick yelled at Tinsley.

    Is Jeff becoming an offensive machine?

    AJ played well tonight as did Freddie, I thought for a minute there Rick was going to finish the game with those two, but Reggie and Jamaal came back in the game a few minutes later than normal.

    Looking at the schedules of teams like the Bucks, Hornets, and Heat, the Pacers are more likely to face the Heat in the second round than in the first. Heat are a very well coached team

  • #2
    Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

    I was at the game, 13th row behind the pacer bench. And ya, it was a defensive dogfight. Miami played great D. There was one stretch where it seemed the pacers had every shot blocked for like 8 straight possesions. Most of them by AL doing his patented drive to the basket weaklike and get blocked offense. Is there anyone in the league that gets blocked more than AL? Good thing JO was there tonight or pacers lose bad. same with Ron. He took a beating tonight. He was getting hammered in the paint.
    when Ron went down on his ankle I got a little nervous, cause he actually asked to be taken out! I thought for sure his ankle was about to fall off or something for him to do that. But he came back with no limp and all was good. I didn't even see him break his nose, and if he did, he just kept playing like he was in trench warfare.

    1 thing that was really annoying tho was that damn dj, his mic was so friggin loud my ears are still ringing. just spin the freakin records and shut up or at least turn that thing down

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

      I was also at the game (up in the nose bleed section). Jo was clutch down the stretch...
      Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
      I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

        lmao! the east coast lawnmowers )

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

          Let me start with the Miami Heat.

          The Heat do a great job, better than any team I have seen all season, at trapping the pick and roll and rotating out of that trap, often cutting off the two easiest passes. They also double team very hard and yet they appear to never leave anyone open. It seemed like they had 6 defenders. Very, very well coached team. Looks like a Pat Riley coached team to me, a lot of credit needs to go to Stan Van Gundy. They have a lot of very athletic guys, so that makes their defense tough.

          On to the Pacers, I know many of you will say the Pacers did not play well, I disagree, the Heat's defense will make you look bad.

          Was that the best terrible game you have ever seen a player play. I am talking about Ron Artest. He had 6 steals, several other deflections that lead to steals, and he got the whole Heat team into foul trouble. The terrible part were the turnovers and missed shots, but he got two huge steals in the last 2 minutes and the two biggest rebs of the game.

          Even Ronnie's "bad" games are great

          J.O. was key, he hit big shot after big shot in the second half and also had a few huge blocked shots.

          Rick Carlisle was fuming mad at Tinsley for that home run pass late in the game, you don't see Rick get mad at individual players too often, does anyone who was at the game know what Rick yelled at Tinsley.

          Is Jeff becoming an offensive machine?

          AJ played well tonight as did Freddie, I thought for a minute there Rick was going to finish the game with those two, but Reggie and Jamaal came back in the game a few minutes later than normal.

          Looking at the schedules of teams like the Bucks, Hornets, and Heat, the Pacers are more likely to face the Heat in the second round than in the first. Heat are a very well coached team
          I hate that btw.

          The double standard that he shows to certain players sometimes drives me up a wall. His pass was no more stupid than any number of shot selections that Artest does in any given game, yet Rick chooses to "let those go" without comment.

          BTW, you are correct about the Heat. If they could only get a better big man, no offense to Grant but at this stage he would be a better backup, they have the basis for a very solid team.

          Riley's coaching certainly has rubbed off on Stan Van Gundy.


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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


            I hate that btw.

            The double standard that he shows to certain players sometimes drives me up a wall. His pass was no more stupid than any number of shot selections that Artest does in any given game, yet Rick chooses to "let those go" without comment.
            Totally disagree. Ron's shot select isn't as blatantly stupid as Jamaal trying to make a "home run" pass very late in the game when the Heat are still within striking distance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


              I hate that btw.

              The double standard that he shows to certain players sometimes drives me up a wall. His pass was no more stupid than any number of shot selections that Artest does in any given game, yet Rick chooses to "let those go" without comment.
              Totally disagree. Ron's shot select isn't as blatantly stupid as Jamaal trying to make a "home run" pass very late in the game when the Heat are still within striking distance.
              I'm not just talking about this game btw, although how many times did Ron run the shot clock down yesterday by holding the ball & then flicking up some wild shot. His shot selection just doesn't show the immediate result like Jamaal's bad passes do, but if he misses & the the other team gets the ball it's the same result.

              I stand by my statement, I think there is a double standard. But hey, it's Carlisle's right to have the double standard if he wants to. It's just not my preferance.


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

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


                I'm not just talking about this game btw, although how many times did Ron run the shot clock down yesterday by holding the ball & then flicking up some wild shot. His shot selection just doesn't show the immediate result like Jamaal's bad passes do, but if he misses & the the other team gets the ball it's the same result.

                I stand by my statement, I think there is a double standard. But hey, it's Carlisle's right to have the double standard if he wants to. It's just not my preferance.
                I don't think Rick has a double standard.

                I don't think it's a double standard to give your better players more leeway. I think every good coach does that. A double standard would be when you have players of equal ability and you pull one for a bonehead play, but you don't the other for doing the same thing.

                Then again a lot of times a perceived double standard comes about because of circumstances. Say you have two point guards and you pull the first because of a bad pass. Then the second makes the same mistake, what do you do? You don't have a third point guard to go to, so you're left with switching points again or giving the 2nd guy another chance. Usually you're equally dissatisfied with both so you might as well leave the 2nd guy out there until he makes another mistake. Not a double standard, just circumstances.

                I've seen Rick pull both players for bonehead plays so there's no double standard there.

                Tinsley's bonehead pass last night was magnified because it was in the last minute of the ballgame when you should be taking special care of the ball not making risky passes.

                With Tinsley, it's you can take the player out of the playground but it's very hard to take the playground out of the player.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


                  I'm not just talking about this game btw, although how many times did Ron run the shot clock down yesterday by holding the ball & then flicking up some wild shot. His shot selection just doesn't show the immediate result like Jamaal's bad passes do, but if he misses & the the other team gets the ball it's the same result.

                  I stand by my statement, I think there is a double standard. But hey, it's Carlisle's right to have the double standard if he wants to. It's just not my preferance.
                  I don't think Rick has a double standard.

                  I don't think it's a double standard to give your better players more leeway. I think every good coach does that. A double standard would be when you have players of equal ability and you pull one for a bonehead play, but you don't the other for doing the same thing.

                  Then again a lot of times a perceived double standard comes about because of circumstances. Say you have two point guards and you pull the first because of a bad pass. Then the second makes the same mistake, what do you do? You don't have a third point guard to go to, so you're left with switching points again or giving the 2nd guy another chance. Usually you're equally dissatisfied with both so you might as well leave the 2nd guy out there until he makes another mistake. Not a double standard, just circumstances.

                  I've seen Rick pull both players for bonehead plays so there's no double standard there.

                  Tinsley's bonehead pass last night was magnified because it was in the last minute of the ballgame when you should be taking special care of the ball not making risky passes.

                  With Tinsley, it's you can take the player out of the playground but it's very hard to take the playground out of the player.
                  I agree. Ron should get a bit more leeway than Tinsley. And i'm still not sure that Rick is completely sold on Tins. And as for the playground part, I think he's gotten most of that out of his system. He's been a lot better this year.
                  Play Mafia!
                  Twitter

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


                    I'm not just talking about this game btw, although how many times did Ron run the shot clock down yesterday by holding the ball & then flicking up some wild shot. His shot selection just doesn't show the immediate result like Jamaal's bad passes do, but if he misses & the the other team gets the ball it's the same result.

                    I stand by my statement, I think there is a double standard. But hey, it's Carlisle's right to have the double standard if he wants to. It's just not my preferance.
                    I don't think Rick has a double standard.

                    I don't think it's a double standard to give your better players more leeway. I think every good coach does that. A double standard would be when you have players of equal ability and you pull one for a bonehead play, but you don't the other for doing the same thing.

                    Then again a lot of times a perceived double standard comes about because of circumstances. Say you have two point guards and you pull the first because of a bad pass. Then the second makes the same mistake, what do you do? You don't have a third point guard to go to, so you're left with switching points again or giving the 2nd guy another chance. Usually you're equally dissatisfied with both so you might as well leave the 2nd guy out there until he makes another mistake. Not a double standard, just circumstances.

                    I've seen Rick pull both players for bonehead plays so there's no double standard there.

                    Tinsley's bonehead pass last night was magnified because it was in the last minute of the ballgame when you should be taking special care of the ball not making risky passes.

                    With Tinsley, it's you can take the player out of the playground but it's very hard to take the playground out of the player.
                    How much more leeway does the better player get? One bad pass vs. five bad shots? 10 - 1?

                    If Ron took a bad shot once & nothing happened & Jamaal did a bad pass once & nothing happened then I could see your point. But for every bad pass that Jamaal has thrown Ron has shot at least 5 bad shots.

                    Also I disagree with the entire concept of letting your better player have more leeway.

                    I don't agree that Iverson should be allowed to not practice while the rest of the team has to. I know it's not the same thing but it's the same princaple.

                    What's good for one player is good for all players IMO.

                    But hey, this is Artest were talking about here. I don't know that I am going to get anybody to agree with me online about him.

                    You wouldn't even want to hear my part about Ron not being a better player. Yes, I know U.B.'s head is about to explode.


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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

                      Artest >> Tinsley

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

                        How much more leeway does the better player get? One bad pass vs. five bad shots? 10 - 1.
                        Hey, let's not forget that Ron turns it over more than Jamaal, too. 2.86/G to 2.15/G...........
                        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


                          How much more leeway does the better player get? One bad pass vs. five bad shots? 10 - 1?

                          If Ron took a bad shot once & nothing happened & Jamaal did a bad pass once & nothing happened then I could see your point. But for every bad pass that Jamaal has thrown Ron has shot at least 5 bad shots.

                          Also I disagree with the entire concept of letting your better player have more leeway.

                          I don't agree that Iverson should be allowed to not practice while the rest of the team has to. I know it's not the same thing but it's the same princaple.

                          What's good for one player is good for all players IMO.

                          But hey, this is Artest were talking about here. I don't know that I am going to get anybody to agree with me online about him.

                          You wouldn't even want to hear my part about Ron not being a better player. Yes, I know U.B.'s head is about to explode.




                          I was content not to enter into this discussion, but then I read your comment Peck. "Ron not being a better player" Better than Tinsley? Or better than Ronnie was last season? If my head is going to explode, I would like it to explode for the right reason.


                          The question is, if Ron would have thrown that same exact pass in that situation, what would Rick have done. (keep in mind Tinsley was not yanked from the game) I don't know, Rick would not have been too happy with Ronnie.

                          In a more general sense, I agree with Peck, every player should be held to the same standard, every player should be expected to: play hard, be on time, follow game plan, "play the right way".

                          Should every player be treated the exact same? This is a tougher question. It is the carrot or the stick question. Some players respond to a stick while others respond better to a carrot



                          As to the bad shots Ronnie took yesterday. Ronnie admitted it to the media afterward. But he was being aggressive, he was getting to the line

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54

                            [quote="Peck"]

                            How much more leeway does the better player get? One bad pass vs. five bad shots? 10 - 1?

                            Your coming across as saying it's a double standard if the coach lets one player get away with more mistakes than another. Of course you do! Of course you let the Kevin Garnett's of the game take five bad shots to Fred Hoilberg's one bad pass. And yes in some cases 10 to 1.

                            If Ron took a bad shot once & nothing happened & Jamaal did a bad pass once & nothing happened then I could see your point. But for every bad pass that Jamaal has thrown Ron has shot at least 5 bad shots.

                            Your not looking at this right. You should look at a players total game not just mistake for mistake.

                            Also I disagree with the entire concept of letting your better player have more leeway.

                            I don't agree that Iverson should be allowed to not practice while the rest of the team has to. I know it's not the same thing but it's the same principle.

                            I agree with you on Iverson, but as you said it's not the same thing and principle doesn't count in this case.

                            I agree all players should be treated equal . . . except on the playing floor where some are better than others. Since they are not equal it would be a mistake to treat them as such.


                            The same principle exists in other games, even in life. In the game of chess for instant, the pieces are not equal and anyone treating them as such will lose quickly. In life try treating your wife like any other women . . . hehe. You will really lose then!

                            You wouldn't even want to hear my part about Ron not being a better player. Yes, I know U.B.'s head is about to explode.

                            <shaking head> You wanted to disagree with Jose and couldn't so now you are just disagreeing to be disagreeing. You wouldn't get that one to fly anywhere.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: J.O. and Ronnie lead the Pacers to #54


                              How much more leeway does the better player get? One bad pass vs. five bad shots? 10 - 1?

                              If Ron took a bad shot once & nothing happened & Jamaal did a bad pass once & nothing happened then I could see your point. But for every bad pass that Jamaal has thrown Ron has shot at least 5 bad shots.

                              Also I disagree with the entire concept of letting your better player have more leeway.
                              If Tinsley was the best defender in the league, RC would probably give him a little more leeway on the offensive end.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X