Tweet
Very impressive win tonight, JO was consistent and very dominant. I think its starting to look as though shooting guard will be this team's biggest question mark as opposed to the point guard position. Sarunas once again showed how clutch he is and how effective he can be in running the team when actually given the chance. More importantly, his performance showed that the +/- stat is not useless as people like Seth imply, since Sarunas/Foster/DA will probably be at the top, and rightfully so.
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.
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
-
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
heh, ask and you shall recieve.
Sarunas is amazing off of pick and rolls that's how we need to use him to get him started once he hits those little runners he can step from behind the line and nail people to the wall. He's also doing really well with Tinsley and his passes are as usual phenomonal lets hope he can build on this, he always seems to have a let down right after games like this or we just flat out don't use him the same way.
The way Lebron James was getting foul calls tonight I thought maybe another certain #23 had come out of retirement. That was ridiculous most ticky tack foul calls i've seen all year for someone who is so "tough and strong" they sure do like to keep the NBA poster boy safe.
Jackson didn't have a good shooting night and none of us are surprised, but Jack was giving Lebron fits when he was guarding him, you could see it in Lebrons expressions that he was getting ticked. If jack doesn't have a good shooting night I expect him at least to contribute to some turnovers and get down there and try and rebound and I think he did an above average job with that.
Danny showed his intelligence when his 3-pointer wasn't falling he started driving to the basket and picking up fouls he as well did a good job guarding lebron but picked up quite a few touch fouls (see above description of lebron).
Tinsley if I remember right didn't miss that many at the foul line and did an excellent job of getting the ball to people most notably JO there were a few times he'd split the defenders on a bounce pass right to JO on the run and get the basket or get their interior guys in foul trouble.
JO was JO his rebounding percentage has gone down quite a bit and i'm not toooo concerned about that, as long as he's making an effort to get them. JO dominated big Z I mean it was so bad I'd imagine Z is gonna have nightmares about having to guard Jermaine again, I think Jermaine is getting more and more comfortable with the loss of weight and that's bad news for the rest of the league. The best part is, is even though he has lost the weight he still is a big presence in the paint and people know he's going to be there if they're going to drive jermaine is going to be in their face and that thought alone will alter quite a few shots this year. Great game for Jermaine
Darrel Armstong was fantastic energy off the bench that coast to coast move was hilarious, how many guys did he beat on that play that were at least 6-10 years younger than him? That is being lazy, there's no sense in that whatsoever. Not quite on par with his normal percentage from 3 point land but he did knock one or two down I believe.
Al I'm not quite sure how many points or rebounds he got in this game but it did look like his putbacks and layups were at least falling for him. I'll take that for now...baby steps until he is able to find his groove again and step out behind the arc for the 3 pointers.
I noticed the crowd didn't leave this game early like they did the last time. I'm glad our fan base is starting to show some faith when we're down in the game that we have every opportunity to come back, and if the other team doesn't play a full game of basketball they're going to pay for it.
Great game for the pacers and we realllllly needed this one before we make this trip out west. I'm really interested to see the game against the warriors Monta Ellis and Pietrus and Biedrens are doing great thus far in the year and Baron Davis has been revitalized much like Tinsley is and actually in good shape this year thus far. -
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Great win for the P's. I am happy for the players mentioned above but let's not forget how instrumental JT was.
Sarunas showed he can be a potent floor leader and contributor but let's see it happen more often before we any oil annoitment.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Just got back from the game, wow was that first half terrible it nearly put me to sleep.
I don't have the time or patience to give a full report, so let me just make a few observations.
Why, oh why do the Pacers start almost every home game so slow - I don't have the answer, but they start the game soft and not aggressive at all. It has gotten to the point where I expect a bad first half.
So has Marquis played himself into a position where he isn't going to get any time - I don't understand or like that. I will give him some credit as he was a good teammate tonight on the bench, he didn't sulk or cause any problems. I would like to know why Rick doesn't see the value in playing Daniels.
OK, let me get to the meat of what I want to say.
I'm going to repeat something I posted often during the 61 win season. Yes Harrington is a better player than Foster - there is no question about that. However, I think the Pacers are a better team with Foster on the floor with JO, and Granger along the frontline. [b]. I think it is so obvious.
Peck, I know you hate the JO and Jeff combo - but I would think that 95% of the reasons why you don't like JO and Jeff combo would apply more so for Al and JO combo.
That point leads into my next point the two key players for the Pacers tonight were Jeff and Saras with DA a possible 3rd key player (yes I know DA shot horribly) but I just hope we never ever forgot how important energy players are - and how important players who play with all out effort at all times - DA and Jeff does that.
I was impressed with Saras timely shot making. But what was key is that he didn't just stand at the 3 point, he was actually running off picks, getting the ball and hitting shots - but not 3 pointers, but rather 15 footers.
That flagrant foul on Jeff was a joke. Seemed to me they never would have called it if James hadn't reacted, like he did.
When you are watching the game on TV, you cannot fully understand how Jeff and DA change the game. It has nothing to do with stats, but those two energize the whole team - as Rick just said they just compete.
OK that is enough for nowComment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
I agree with you except that granger should come off the bench as his starts are even slower than Al's.Originally posted by Unclebuck View PostComment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Do you want Al guarding the other teams best offensive players - I sure don't. Granger did a great job on James tonight. We need our best defender on the floor to start the game. I'd either bring Al off the bench, or take him out after 3 minutes or soOriginally posted by speakout4 View PostComment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
First and foremost, Jamaal was outstanding tonight. I can count the number of mistakes he made on one hand. He ran the offense well and shot the ball well, but more importantly, he played good defense and hit 2 HUGE buckets to seal the win. This game was all Jamaal, and he deserves a lot of praise for the way he's played lately.
Other then just Jamaal, we won this game because of outstanding point guard play and defensive energy. The obvious difference was the turnovers and points off of them. I can't remember the exact stats, and I'm not going to look them up, but I believe the Cavs commited 19 turnovers and we turned them in to 24 points. We really forced them in to tough spots the whole second half, and they never had a chance once we got the lead.
I'm really confused why Daniels didn't play. I was confused when Rawle started, and more confused when Daniels didn't get in the game at all. That doesn't make any sense to me. I'm glad to get the win, but I'm hoping Rick hasn't decided that he values Rawle over Marquis, because as much as I like Rawle and think he'll be a good player in the future, Marquis brings an aspect to this team that we really need. We could have used him early in this game.
Jeff was outstanding tonight too. He was incredbly active on the offensive glass and defensively he was very good too. Varajeao is a good high energy guy like Jeff, but Jeff has proven himself over and over again to be able to consistently top players who play like him and feed off of their energy and make more positives for his team. He did the same thing against Gadzuric, who is another similar player. By the way, did anyone notice during a dead ball situation Jeff hoisted up a 22 footer and drained it. That was funny to see.
Praise for Stephen Jackson as well, he had a terrible first half, but defensively he was great all game. Danny did a fantastic job on LeBron as well. In fact we really did a GREAT job guarding LeBron. He got a lot of really pathetic touch fouls which was the reason he went to the line so much. As far as him going to the line though, Quinn Buckner kept saying that you can't let LeBron get to the line so much, but I have to disagree with him there. I'd rather foul LeBron and force him to make two then give him the lane and let him get his confidence soring with a big dunk or 3 point play. Knock him on his *** and play him physical, that's how you beat players like that, and we did that today.
Go Ps, let's carry this momentum in to Toronto and get a win streak going.
Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
WOW, what a great win!!!!! We showed guts again and I couldn't be happier with the effort the team is showing.
Lets start with our two best players, JO and TINS. Both were great JO didn't get a ton of boards but he drew contact and was just absolutely dominant at times in the second half on offense. Tins was fantastic all around tonight. The guy is soooo good when healthy I can't even explain it. Plus he is extremely confident late in games. His three when the Cavs dropped into a zone was the biggest play of the game IMO.
Runi really played well tonight. He torched D. Jones, who is the biggest I talk a lot but can't back it up player in the league. Runi and JO were great together and really played off one another.
Al was bad tonight. He settled for Js and was horribly defensively, but he did pull down boards. So whatever...
Foster played great in the first half. Without him we would have been down by 20+. On top of that he crashed the boards in the second half.
Jack and Granger were bad offensively, but they got in Lebron's jock and made him work for his buckets. I was really happy with their defensive performance.
DA's energy as usual was great.
I am really pumped about the energy this team shows and about our starting PG, Jamaal TInsley. The man can absolutely play basketball. When he is playing well we are so difficult to beat.
BTW I am waiting for Nike to introduce Whiny Lebron to their commercials.
Oops, I better watch out I wouldn't want to be whistled for a foul.
GO PACERS!!! Lets hit this road trip HARD.
Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
I attended tonights game, and I'll throw some pics up in the next couple of days.
Great play by Tinsley, Sarunas, and O'Neal. I'm still worried about rebounding, it seems almost any power forward in the league can put up a double double against us.
I mainly went to this game to see LeBron (this is my 2nd Pacers game of the year BTW), but wow, I was a little disappointed. The only guy in the league that gets more calls than LeBron is Wade (maybe Kobe). Also, while watching this game, I ended up sitting by two Cleveland "fans" (one of the guys didn't know that the NBA bonus starts at five fouls). Anyways, he mentions that the Pacers have one of the worst point guard rotations in the league with Tinsley (injured) and Armstrong (ancient). Of course, I throughly owned them by pointing out how bad Cleveland's rotation of Jones (highly one-dimensional) and Snow (one of the most washed up players in the league) is. This got me thinking, just how good is Cleveland? It seems they were picked by most of the experts to win the Central and go far in the playoffs (I think I might have picked them, I can't remember). Yes, they have a good record. However, if you look at it in dept, they've only beat one team with a winning record (granted it was San Antonio).
I know about the LeBron factor, but do you think this team can go deep in the playoffs when Snow and Jones get around 25 minutes apiece? There bench is mediocre at best. Hughes' health is always a question, and I don't see guys like Gooden and Z giving LeBron what he needs for a supporting cast. Does anyone know how much it would've cost the Cavs to sign Redd instead of Hughes?
Anyways, great win tonight. Hopefully we can play well on this brutal west coast trip.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
What a great game, even though the first half was horrible. I was home for thanksgiving and got to go to this one. I was about 8 rows from the floor smack dab in the middle, it was awesome. Got a great deal from a scalper.
Anyhow, Sarunas won this game for us and Jacksons/Grangers defense on Lebron was great even though he scored about 30 points. Granger is TOO GOOD of a defender. He has way to quick of hands and he got nailed with at least two bs calls.
Whats the deal with Rawle Marshall starting, that is kind of a joke to me. Start sarunas for crying out loud. I mean Saras/Da/Jack/Quis are all better players than Rawle I just didn't understand that one bit.
I know for a FACT that Sarunas would play better as a starter, his game is so dependent upon his confidence that it's insane not to do everything possible to make him confident. Tonight he was confident and it showed. Early on he wouldn't shoot and my dad said something about it. He was very timid to begin with, then he took his first shot and missed it and i saw him kind of look to the bench expecting to be pulled. Carlisle let him play through it and wow what a difference that made. Both of his three pointers were EXTREMELY timely.
Foster should also be starting with Granger probably coming off the bench. Al needs to be a starter because he is that caliber of a player, Granger would be great coming off the bench and i'd like to see that.
Rawle didn't do anything and I just wonder why the hell he started, quis or runi should clearly start at shooting guard. Tinsley for the most part played a good game and I was impressed with him defensively on a few possesions, but i HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE when he runs down the court and just shoots it without passing. I NEVER want to see a point guard do that.
Jermaine played a great game and he is kind of winning me over lately. He made big z a NON FACTOR completely. Pollard wore a nice suit tonight also.
I am guessing we can expect to see Harrison wearing a suit all season, what a worthless player he is.....what a shame.
Seeing Rawle Marshall start and based on the few other games i've seen I have realized that Rawle and Marquis are basically the same player. Maybe we could package one of them along with tinsley for a shooting guard who can actually shoot.
I REALLY like Sjack off the bench, lets keep it that way.
All in all a great win and Sarunas/DA combo just makes me want to hug total strangers.
DA= GOD. He does so much for this team as a "chemistry" guy. go to a game and you will see what I mean.
Oh yeah who was that guy for the cavalier who laid down a sick dunk and knocked down a three? That guy looked like a baller.*removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Lets face it they might as well change their name to the Lebrons. If he ever got hurt they might be the worst team in the history of the NBA.Originally posted by Mile Square View Post
Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
I don't think Al was bad tonight, and I don't think he settled for jumpshots too often either. I don't think he had a great game, not even a good one, but he didn't hurt the team. I think he only took somewhere in the range of 7-10 shots, but I haven't looked at the boxscore so I could be wrong about that.
One thing I forgot to mention is that the two biggest weaknesses of this team, rebounding and turnovers, were both very strong tonight. That says something about this team.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
The Cavs are indeed HORRIBLE without LeBron. Everyone hyped all those moves made a few offseasons ago, but IMO they were stupid then and still are. Z is practically worthless in today's NBA. Picking up D.Marshall and possibly D.Jones were the only moves I liked, because surrounding James with shooters is never a bad idea, and I'm kinda a Marshall fan. However, Jones gets wayyy too much playing time.
Great second half from the Pacers today! Tins and JO looked awesome out there. Jack played good D, I guess. He picked up a stupid T, though, and got some pretty heavy boos. I didn't boo but was audibly frustrated. Where was Quisy?
Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Just got back from the game myself. Sat next to a bunch of fair weather fans in a part of Sec. 11 that I usually never frequent.
Foster and Armstrong stand out as the most heralded of the unheralded tonight. I love the way these guys do their thing. As so much has already been said about the positives and negatives, I just have a couple of comments:
1) I wonder what the game would have been like had Granger been on Lebron from the tipoff. I believe that this guy will eventually be regarded as our shut-down defender.
2) Anybody else starting to note a different trend compared to last year? Last year we would build a lead and let people come back and beat us. This year, although admittedly it's early in the season, we are the ones that seem to be coming back from big deficits and are actually finishing these games fairly well.
3) I'm scratching my head as to how we can beat Cleveland, which is likely to win it's division this year, but lose to other teams that aren't nearly as talented, like Boston (and perhaps even Washington and Chicago which haven't been playing well so far).Comment
-
Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers vs. Cavs
Who would have thought Jamaal Tinsley would become this teams second scorer..???Comment
Comment