Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

    Well, I have no clue.

    A week ago I honestly felt like we were starting to turn the corner, that while I never thought we were going to win a title with this team I thought that we would at least be fun to watch & would be a team that other teams didn't look forward to meeting in the playoffs.

    Now a week later I'm banging my head against a wall trying to figure out exactly what went wrong.

    I mean we all know the symptoms. Poor defense, lack of offensive execution, scoring droughts.

    But the question is what is the disease? Why are we having these problems?

    We all knew that overall the trade most likley had a slight decrease in talent & that defensively we would suffer. But I'm not sure that the three players that play on our team from that trade are the catalyst for the poor defense we've seen.

    Mike is a solid team defender, IMO. He rotates fairly well & will do what he can to help double the post. Man on man coverage he tends to get beat laterally but I just don't see him as a gaping hole on the defense.

    Honestly he is not the defender Jackson was, nor will he ever be, but the guy is not Reggie Theus either.

    Troy is a decent shot blocker, will body up on defense & his man to man defense is solid if not spectacular. The problem may be here though that since he is slightly smaller than Jeff & J.O. he tends to guard the smaller player on the floor while J.O. is forced to guard the bigger post player. Now to me this makes perfect sense, but we all know how this tends to work out over the course of a season with J.O.

    I don't see this as a huge problem either at the moment. However Troy's offense & rebounding make up for some of this loss on the defensive end.

    Ike is raw. U.B. is saying he see's Harrison like tendency's in Ike. I just don't see that. I have yet to see Ike grab a player by the arm & push them out of bounds, but hey it could happen.

    Look I pray every night that the Pacers get a coach in here to work with Ike. It's to late for Harrison, but Ike can be something special.

    To quote that great man who built a rocket & flew to the moon, you know Apollo Creed , Ike has "the eye of the tiger".

    There is an inner beast in him that just needs the proper molding & shaping. Something that Dan Burke & Chuck Person are not going to give him.

    I've said it before & I'll say it again. Kermit Washington is available & has spent years at the feet of Pete Newell teaching the art of the big man game.

    Yes, I know about the punch, but that has been a quarter of a century ago now so I think the statute of limitations has run out on this guy being black balled from the NBA.

    But even if they don't want him get somebody anybody who knows how to play big, to teach this kid.

    His defense is not ready for prime time for sure, but he is a willing physical player. Something we haven't had since, well we all know since when.

    He may be a little undersized but those arms make him bigger than he is. Besides he's just getting spot min. anyway filling in for J.O. so I hardly think this collapse is due to him.

    This leaves us with the other three players that start.

    Well at the S.F. spot, IMO, Danny is an upgrade over Al. So to me that is not the problem.

    J.O. is J.O. so you can hardly point the finger at him on the defensive end.

    This leads us to our p.g.

    As we sat at BW3's after the game the Sonics last second shot to beat the Pacers from early this season was shown.

    I mentioned to Roaming Gnome, Diamond Dave & Hicks that all that we needed was someone with editing skills to take that video & litterally draw a red cape on Jamaal's arm & give him one of those little hats. Because that was about as good of an example of matador defense as you will ever see.

    You wish to drive the lane on me? Ole'!!!!! (I stole this from Scott H.)

    But guess what, this isn't new. Jamaal's defense is what it is & has been for years now.

    So what is so differant? I'm not sure I know what is wrong here. I'm sure that U.B. will say that not having Foster in the game is the problem. If he is correct than all I'll say is this, any talk about J.O. being the D.P.O.Y. should end right there. If he can't guard the players that Jeff guards at the same level then he isn't the defender he's being made out to be. He's bigger than Jeff, he's stronger than Jeff & he's faster than Jeff. There is no excuse for this. I don't know that I believe this anyway.

    Ok, so I can't get a diagnosis on the defense.

    What about lack of offensive execution?

    Gnome forwarded the thought that maybe they miss Daniels more than they ever thought they would.

    Hard to say. He sure is an upgrade over Marshall, but that is nothing againts Rawle but he is what he is.

    However I wouldn't call Marquis the model of offensive execution. Diamond Dave's nick name for Daniels is Cluster %*ck, because he's at his best when the play goes to hell & he has to make something happen.

    But having that 10-12 ppg coming off of the bench is nice so yes this does hurt.

    But really is that the reason things are going south?

    At first it was because Mike couldn't hit the water from a boat & Troy was slowed by his nose. But that is not the case for this last game. Mike led us in scoring & hit very well from the field & Troy had a solid game. J.O.'s still getting his 19 ppg so there is no change there. You could ask & you would be right to ask how a player that has so much of the offense run through him can only avg. 19 ppg but that is no differant than earlier this season.

    Danny again is an upgrade over Al just from a consistancy standpoint. But I think he is even out scoring more on avg. since he took over as a starter.

    Troy Murphy is light years ahead of Foster so this is not a problem, in fact it was one of the reasons that we won so many after the trade & have been able to keep in the games close.

    Thus once again we come back to the p.g.

    What's sad is that I have to feel gratefull & happy that Jamaal only took 16 shots in the game instead of the 20+ shots we've come to know & love.

    Now here is the shocker on this.

    As of now, I no longer blame Jamaal Tinsley for this. This is Rick Carlisle, it has to be.

    Because if he is letting him play this way even though he is telling him not to then he has totally lost the team & frankly needs fired right now.

    He has to be not only condoning this but encouraging this. I don't know why, I've read showcase for a trade although I have a very hard time believing the team would do this just to move a player.

    All I know is this. The first three games after the trade I saw off the ball movement, I saw ball movement, I saw many players involved in the offense.

    Now I see way to many times where there is no movement & the ball makes one or two passes before a shot goes up.

    Who is doing this & why?

    I'm just putting out questions here guys, I don't have any real solid answers.

    Ok, let's deal with the ref. issue.

    We are public enemy # 1 to the refs.

    Why? Well to the shock & chagrin of Mr. O'Neal & many of you it has nothing to do with the brawl at the palace.

    This is a problem that started when Isiah was here & frankly only the NBA cracking down has stopped it on our team.

    We had two of the worst chronic ******ers in the NBA in Jackson & O'Neal. There is not an offensive play that happens where J.O. doesn't feel as though he were assulted & until this season would stand & jaw with the refs. after almost every play.

    There were many times that Jackson would be back talking to a ref. while the other players had to go 4 on 5.

    I'm telling you that Refs. are human too. You cannot cry foul every play & you can't spend the entire game jawing at them. They get tired of hearing it & frankly after so long, right or wrong, they start to tune you out & stop giving you the benefit of the doubt.

    I'll add one more person to this mix, David Harrison. You honestly think David actaully fouls everytime they call it on him? Well, yes for the most part he does. however because of his constan whining & demonstrative attitude he long ago lost any & all benefit of the doubt points he had.

    Am I saying all of this is right? No, I'm not but I'm saying the Pacers made their bed & they have to lie in it.

    Armstrongs response was totally uncalled for. I don't care what the ref. said or how he acted.

    If the NBA suspends Armstrong for a game I would not be opposed to it.

    Now I kind of get the idea that both Rick & Darrel were trying to get the team fired up a little bit, but I also think both of them were upset for real as well.

    I can only wonder what Walsh must have been thinking when all of that was going on?

    Actually you have to wonder what tptb were thinking when Jamaal got boo'd for most of the night.

    If you weren't there let me tell you, he was boo'd loudly. He missed a three & it was pretty viscious.

    I think the fans are really just sick of him & frankly I think some of them want to purge the team of both Jamaal & Jermaine.

    Ok, maybe that's just me that wants to do that, but still.

    I still love the trade, but right now we are in some very very very rough waters.

    However no matter how bad things are I keep reminding myself of Ike grabbing fierce rebounds & I get happier.

    Ok, one final question before I go.

    Why has Shawne Williams gotten DNP-CD's the last three games? He needs min. to develop, why are we not letting him do this?

    Anyway, I think beating the Clippers on Sunday needs to happen.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

    Maybe the refs are out to get us or at least biased whether consciously or otherwise due to our ongoing rep of complaining, brawling, and other nefarious off-court activities. Either way, JO, DA and whoever else stating it to the press after a frustrating loss amounts to no more than crying in one's beer as far as I'm concerned. Sounds like yet another excuse. Get out there and start busting your *** and go beat some teams.

    I would be amongst the camp your refer to, Peck, with regards to JT and JO. I see them as the holdovers from the core group back to the brawl and they are starting to wear thin on me. If this is the best we can do, then I'd prefer a more traditional rebuild be undertaken in the not too distant future. Hate to start harping on this again but the leadership void on this team still slaps you in the face and it starts with RC and works right on down IMO.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

      Once again Peck you are "Spot-on" about the zebras.

      As much as I've carped about JT...I'd like to see what the TEAM would be like with a different coach.

      It's normally easier to replace the coach than a whole team, except when that coach has just signed a contract extension and gotten a promotion to Exec. VP of "lightbulbs" or something. But I'd like to see what could be done. Would that overcome JT's knuckleheaded determination to drive on Ben Wallace? No, but a change in team play might make JT more tolerable (man does THAT leave a bad taste in the mouth). And while we're at it, does Donnie Walsh REALLY need a 6'9" shadow? At this point I'm thinking Mel Daniels may be just as effective, if not more, than Larry.

      But then I'm not on the inside, I'm but a mere mortal that buys the tickets or watches the commercials that pay for the TV/radio programming.


      (Note all of the above was written w/o once thinking of the Club Rio Trio.)
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

        Originally posted by Peck View Post

        Ike is raw. U.B. is saying he see's Harrison like tendency's in Ike. I just don't see that. I have yet to see Ike grab a player by the arm & push them out of bounds, but hey it could happen.

        Look I pray every night that the Pacers get a coach in here to work with Ike. It's to late for Harrison, but Ike can be something special.
        Wait a minute - please let me clarify what I mean. First let me re-state what I said and then what I meant.

        I did say I think after either the Sonics game or the Warriors game that I saw some things from Ike as far as team defense and please let me make this very clear right here - I'm only comparing Ike with DH in the team defense dept - I am not comparing the two players in any other way - but Ike seems very lost on what to do on team defense. There were a number of teams when he was no where to be found in the transition defense.

        Perhaps he's still learning the defensive system. Lord knows Nellie didn't teach him anything in regards to defense and who knows what Montgomery did with him. So I'm willing to give him some time.

        So please don't misinterpret my remarks. Perhaps I should have left Harrison's name out of my post to begin with.

        Because I really like Ike - he has a long way to go and needs a lot of refinement to his game, but if he is a hard worker and if he can grasp things pretty well - he can be an all star player and can be the best player in the 8 player trade.

        I love the way he goes after rebounds - Dale Davis like - he's got great hands. He has a number of impressive post moves with either hand. He needs a ton of work in passing out of double teams though.

        Except for his very refined footwork and his excellence shooting skills - it looks like he's only played a few years of basketball. - Does anyone know his high school background.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          This leads us to our p.g.

          As we sat at BW3's after the game the Sonics last second shot to beat the Pacers from early this season was shown.

          I mentioned to Roaming Gnome, Diamond Dave & Hicks that all that we needed was someone with editing skills to take that video & litterally draw a red cape on Jamaal's arm & give him one of those little hats. Because that was about as good of an example of matador defense as you will ever see.

          You wish to drive the lane on me? Ole'!!!!! (I stole this from Scott H.)

          But guess what, this isn't new. Jamaal's defense is what it is & has been for years now.

          So what is so differant? I'm not sure I know what is wrong here. I'm sure that U.B. will say that not having Foster in the game is the problem. If he is correct than all I'll say is this, any talk about J.O. being the D.P.O.Y. should end right there. If he can't guard the players that Jeff guards at the same level then he isn't the defender he's being made out to be. He's bigger than Jeff, he's stronger than Jeff & he's faster than Jeff. There is no excuse for this. I don't know that I believe this anyway.

          Ok, so I can't get a diagnosis on the defense.

          After the Sonics game in Seattle I made a huge point out of the fact that Tinsley was in perfect position to help on Ridnour on his game winning shot and with only a few seconds left all you need to do is force him to pass or dribble away from the basket - somehow occupy him for 1 second and the Pacers win the game and what does Tinsley do - at best he did nothing. At worst he might have given Granger the momentary thought that OK I have help coming from the middle.

          Let me say this under - Mike Brown - Tinsley at least got into a defensive stance - he at least tried to play defense. In fact if anyone has old tapes from the 61 win season - go back and watch any game for 5 minutes that is all it would take and you will be almost shocked at the defensive difference. First you'll notice - hey all the players are in a correct defensive stance - and help comes on time not at the last possible second with JO either taking a charge or getting a block.

          I love JO for getting all the blocks and charges - he has to be close to equaling what Ben Wallace did a few years ago as far as number of blocks and charges taken. But it shows how weak not only is our perimeter defense is but our first line of help is hardly ever there. I think it is the new defensive system. - The system is basically if your man beats you - pray JO is ready to take a charge or block a shot. It is actually a similar approach that Isiah used.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

            Originally posted by Peck View Post

            What about lack of offensive execution?

            Gnome forwarded the thought that maybe they miss Daniels more than they ever thought they would.

            Hard to say. He sure is an upgrade over Marshall, but that is nothing againts Rawle but he is what he is.

            However I wouldn't call Marquis the model of offensive execution. Diamond Dave's nick name for Daniels is Cluster %*ck, because he's at his best when the play goes to hell & he has to make something happen.

            But having that 10-12 ppg coming off of the bench is nice so yes this does hurt.

            But really is that the reason things are going south?

            At first it was because Mike couldn't hit the water from a boat & Troy was slowed by his nose. But that is not the case for this last game. Mike led us in scoring & hit very well from the field & Troy had a solid game. J.O.'s still getting his 19 ppg so there is no change there. You could ask & you would be right to ask how a player that has so much of the offense run through him can only avg. 19 ppg but that is no differant than earlier this season.

            Danny again is an upgrade over Al just from a consistancy standpoint. But I think he is even out scoring more on avg. since he took over as a starter.

            Troy Murphy is light years ahead of Foster so this is not a problem, in fact it was one of the reasons that we won so many after the trade & have been able to keep in the games close.

            Thus once again we come back to the p.g.

            What's sad is that I have to feel gratefull & happy that Jamaal only took 16 shots in the game instead of the 20+ shots we've come to know & love.

            Now here is the shocker on this.

            As of now, I no longer blame Jamaal Tinsley for this. This is Rick Carlisle, it has to be.

            Because if he is letting him play this way even though he is telling him not to then he has totally lost the team & frankly needs fired right now.

            He has to be not only condoning this but encouraging this. I don't know why, I've read showcase for a trade although I have a very hard time believing the team would do this just to move a player.

            All I know is this. The first three games after the trade I saw off the ball movement, I saw ball movement, I saw many players involved in the offense.

            Now I see way to many times where there is no movement & the ball makes one or two passes before a shot goes up.

            Who is doing this & why?

            I'm just putting out questions here guys, I don't have any real solid answers.

            You know how I feel about the Tinsley vs Rick situation. TPTB traded away AJ for a very specfic reason. AJ rightfully so believed he earned the starting job - and he did earn it fair and square - but Bird and Walsh didn't want a point guard controversy so they forced Rick to go with Tinsley. They knew he would not turn to Saras like he did with AJ. They knew DA couldn't play many minutes - so Rick was forced into playing Tinsley.

            OK, so as a coach such as Rick what do you do. You can't make trades - you want to keep your job. So you say to yourself OK I have to make it work with Tinsley - that is perhaps the key for me to keep my job. So Rick has done everything he can do this whole season to try and pump out as many wins as possible out of this team - and that means trying to get Tinsley to play his best - you have to make him happy or he sits 5 games with a sinus problem. So what do you do - you let him shoot- sure you try to coach him on good shots and bad shots. But you can't bench him you can't bring in a new guy - you have no choice - but let him shoot and just try to manage it as best as you can. And that is what Rick is doing I'm 99.9% sure of it.

            I hope that is clear

            Rick isn't showcasing Tinsley - that is insulting to Rick.

            It is like if you manage people at your job and there is one employee who is just trouble - but for whatever reason you know your boss isn't going to fire him - it is your job then to make it work.

            My point is Rick doesn't want Tinsley taking all those shots - but Rick is powerless to do anything about it. He doesn't have AJ to put in the game. So Rick tries to message the situation - yes I have to let Tinsley shoot the ball. I can't bench him for taking bad shots - because I have to win games to keep my job and TPTB traded away AJ and no one else can play the point guard.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

              Originally posted by Peck View Post


              Armstrongs response was totally uncalled for. I don't care what the ref. said or how he acted.

              If the NBA suspends Armstrong for a game I would not be opposed to it.

              Now I kind of get the idea that both Rick & Darrel were trying to get the team fired up a little bit, but I also think both of them were upset for real as well.

              I can only wonder what Walsh must have been thinking when all of that was going on?

              Actually you have to wonder what tptb were thinking when Jamaal got boo'd for most of the night.

              If you weren't there let me tell you, he was boo'd loudly. He missed a three & it was pretty viscious.

              I think the fans are really just sick of him & frankly I think some of them want to purge the team of both Jamaal & Jermaine.

              Ok, maybe that's just me that wants to do that, but still.

              I still love the trade, but right now we are in some very very very rough waters.

              However no matter how bad things are I keep reminding myself of Ike grabbing fierce rebounds & I get happier.

              Ok, one final question before I go.

              Why has Shawne Williams gotten DNP-CD's the last three games? He needs min. to develop, why are we not letting him do this?

              Anyway, I think beating the Clippers on Sunday needs to happen.


              I don't have real problem with what DA did. It wasn't good and I hope he doesn't do it again and yes he'll either get a big fine or a suspension for what he did as he was leaving the court. DA has always gotten angry like that - couple times a year he has done that.


              Final comment is this - what if we traded JO, Tinsley, Harrison - - JO has a lot of value build the team around the players we get for JO and around Ike, Shawne, keep Murph and Dun and hopefully Foster - not sure about daniels. Bring in a new coach.

              My question then is if we do that - will the fans come back next season with a young team that maybe wins 35 games but has some nice young players a new approach and the purge has ended. - Is that what is needed

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                Originally posted by Uncle Buck
                Final comment is this - what if we traded JO, Tinsley, Harrison - - JO has a lot of value build the team around the players we get for JO and around Ike, Shawne, keep Murph and Dun and hopefully Foster - not sure about daniels. Bring in a new coach.

                My question then is if we do that - will the fans come back next season with a young team that maybe wins 35 games but has some nice young players a new approach and the purge has ended. - Is that what is needed
                I'd say 'No. Not next year."

                Even if TPTB do everything right, it is going to take a long time to improve the fan base. The restoration gets farther and farther away with every uninspired loss and with every off-court episode. The restoration will never happen until the team is likeable on and off the court, but it won't happen soon even it if is. The big question about this is: How are we ever going to know for sure that "the purge is ended"? How deep does the cancer go?

                As I've noted several times before, I know a lot of serious sports fans who don't give any thought to the Pacers. They live and breathe sports (one guy even lost his wife over it), but not the Pacers.

                I've recently been thinking of starting my own little Pacers "missionary" movement, and on Monday night, I invited a guy I've known a long time to the Golden State game. I don't think the Pacers' stinky performance did anything to convince my friend to return to Conseco on his own dime any time soon, and I know the newspaper headlines on Wednesday didn't.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                  Regarding the refs...

                  If JO's the problem, why are they taking it out on Jeff Foster? That was bizarre.

                  And I've only been to one game this year, but it seems like Jermaine talks to the refs less than he used to. Am I wrong in that?
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Anyway, I think beating the Clippers on Sunday needs to happen.
                    Sorry to focus on just this one line but when I read this, two names came to mind. Sam Cassell & Shaun Livingston.

                    Don't be surprised that Tinsley launches 25 more shots & we loose again.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      Regarding the refs...

                      If JO's the problem, why are they taking it out on Jeff Foster? That was bizarre.

                      And I've only been to one game this year, but it seems like Jermaine talks to the refs less than he used to. Am I wrong in that?
                      I think the refs are so tired of listening to the complaining that all Pacer players are on a very short leash.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        Regarding the refs...

                        If JO's the problem, why are they taking it out on Jeff Foster? That was bizarre.

                        And I've only been to one game this year, but it seems like Jermaine talks to the refs less than he used to. Am I wrong in that?
                        You are correct. Jermaine talks to the refs a lot less this season.

                        But that is not because he has "seen the light". It's because the NBA's new no B.S. policy (which I love).

                        However over the past month or so he has started talking again. Nowhere near what he used to but every now & then.

                        The refs. don't take it out on Foster, IMO.

                        Was there a couple of bad calls last night? Sure but sometimes you'll just have that.

                        Actually I think Jeff gets a lot of the benefit of the doubt calls simply because he is not a complainer.


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

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                          I suspect that the off-court troubles have somewhat sapped the team's enthusiasm.

                          Anybody who says that the off-court stuff doesn't affect the on-court stuff is dead wrong.

                          As for movement, why should a player move and work to get an open shot when Tinsley's just going to chuck it up? Once I realize my PG has no interest in trying to get me the ball, I stop trying too. Players are human.
                          You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                          All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                          - Jimmy Buffett

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            My point is Rick doesn't want Tinsley taking all those shots - but Rick is powerless to do anything about it. He doesn't have AJ to put in the game. So Rick tries to message the situation - yes I have to let Tinsley shoot the ball. I can't bench him for taking bad shots - because I have to win games to keep my job and TPTB traded away AJ and no one else can play the point guard.
                            Seeing Jamaal Tinsley's history, I don't buy that. If Rick really wanted to, he could bench Tinsley. Just like he did when he first got here and made Tinsley earn his minutes. Just like he did last season when he decided we needed a player that was consistently healthy at point guard. Rick Carlisle historically likes his point guards to be scoring threats. Look at the three seasons Larry coached the team with Carlisle at his side. During those years Mark Jackson did a lot of posting up smaller guards -- Quinn Buckner even mentioned that last night. Look at Chauncey Billups. Billups always had some sort of offensive game, but it elevated when Carlisle came around. Look at Anthony Johnson. Are you telling me Anthony Johnson also shot the ball more often against Carlisles wishes?

                            If you look at Jamaal Tinsley's career, you'll see that the most he ever shot the ball (before Carlisle) was 9.5 FG attempts per game, and that was his rookie season. They went down each year after that until the year of the brawl. That year he averaged 12 FGA's per game, and I think it's pretty obvious that we needed every bit of it. Then last season his attempts dipped way down. Now this season they're back up to 11 FGA's per game. A lot of times he has a size advantage over the opposing point guard. I have a hard time believing that it's Jamaal Tinsley's idea to try to exploit that so often, and that it looks so eerily similar to the way Bird and Carlisle used to use Mark Jackson. You should really go back and look at the video of the 2000 Playoffs and watch how we used Mark Jackson. Then, watch how we use Tinsley now.

                            I watched Mark Jackson's game very closely back then because I was probably his biggest fan. I admired every aspect of his game. Since the day we brought in Tinsley, I've believed that we saw Mark Jackson when we drafted him. Now, it's quite obvious that Carlisle see's the similarities too. This is why I don't agree with what you're saying about Tinsley shooting the ball against Carlisle's wishes. Tinsley might throw up shots that are questionable, but I don't believe for a second that it's all against Carlisle's wishes.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd thoughts about losing to the Nuggets....

                              Originally posted by Ev_eezy View Post
                              Seeing Jamaal Tinsley's history, I don't buy that. If Rick really wanted to, he could bench Tinsley. Just like he did when he first got here and made Tinsley earn his minutes. Just like he did last season when he decided we needed a player that was consistently healthy at point guard. Rick Carlisle historically likes his point guards to be scoring threats. Look at the three seasons Larry coached the team with Carlisle at his side. During those years Mark Jackson did a lot of posting up smaller guards -- Quinn Buckner even mentioned that last night. Look at Chauncey Billups. Billups always had some sort of offensive game, but it elevated when Carlisle came around. Look at Anthony Johnson. Are you telling me Anthony Johnson also shot the ball more often against Carlisles wishes?

                              If you look at Jamaal Tinsley's career, you'll see that the most he ever shot the ball (before Carlisle) was 9.5 FG attempts per game, and that was his rookie season. They went down each year after that until the year of the brawl. That year he averaged 12 FGA's per game, and I think it's pretty obvious that we needed every bit of it. Then last season his attempts dipped way down. Now this season they're back up to 11 FGA's per game. A lot of times he has a size advantage over the opposing point guard. I have a hard time believing that it's Jamaal Tinsley's idea to try to exploit that so often, and that it looks so eerily similar to the way Bird and Carlisle used to use Mark Jackson. You should really go back and look at the video of the 2000 Playoffs and watch how we used Mark Jackson. Then, watch how we use Tinsley now.

                              I watched Mark Jackson's game very closely back then because I was probably his biggest fan. I admired every aspect of his game. Since the day we brought in Tinsley, I've believed that we saw Mark Jackson when we drafted him. Now, it's quite obvious that Carlisle see's the similarities too. This is why I don't agree with what you're saying about Tinsley shooting the ball against Carlisle's wishes. Tinsley might throw up shots that are questionable, but I don't believe for a second that it's all against Carlisle's wishes.
                              I usually don't read posts this long, but wow, that was insightful...so is the solution to get rid of Richard, or to get a better shooting point guard that would better suit his offense?

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X