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 from the Warriors game....

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

  • #76
    Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
    I don't think any fan likes the way Tinsley is playing. He's capable of so much better play from a team perspective. But Rick gives every indication that Tinsley is transforming into the type of PG he wants.
    well once again, the PG that we should be playing is on his last legs and cannot go game-in and game-out the way we need or would want to play him. greene can't seem to run an offense and i think last night was mcleods first game of the season (not just as a pacer). so we've got to play the PG we have. Quis is down and who else would you like to run the offense? no one here that i've read is arguing with tinsley's talent. he is tremendously talented which is ultimately why he is so frustrating BECAUSE we know he could be light-years better than where he is at now.

    We certainly can't find any/ many quotes from Rick criticizing Jamaal's play, so even if this isn't what Rick has in mind (and I believe this is exactly what he wants from Jamaal, just for Jamaal to shoot those shots at a higher percentage) he appears to be making a 0% effort to stop it.
    this is a combination of what i said before about options at PG and then Rick doesn't subscribe to the Phil Jackson / Pat Riley / Don Nelson / Larry Brown theory of belittling players in the media as motivation. I think Nelson complaining about Murphy and Dunleavy really were damaging the warriors options of trading them, don't you? i mean the pacers had these guys in mind since the artest deal, so what nellie said probably had no impact but other potential suitors, i can't see how his public belittling helped. rick to my knowledge said little bad that wasn't obvious about artest or sjax or al during their time here. and he played all four (counting Tins) while they are pacers. the biggest thing rick ever did was kick sjax off the bench. in my opinion that was HUGE because rick never does that type of stuff. he hides his hand from the media, fairly matter of fact when talking about the team and games and doesn't give great sound bites (a little like dungy or bellichick) so i don't know how much you can judge by on-court minutes or media quotes.

    someone referenced bill fitch saying something about praying that tinsley gets traded on a regular basis (i didn't listen to it, but i think i paraphrased that correctly) don't you get the feeling that could be how rick feels too? but fitch is in the position to say it. you would have thought that rick loved al and sjax looking that the media and the playing time. but i think this is more about tinsleys trade value after not playing for most to two seasons.
    This is the darkest timeline.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

      He doesn't have to belittle them.

      If Tinsley isn't playing the way he wants, he has other choices.

      McLeod was a capable fill-in starter for Jerry Sloan.

      Orien Greene has been around the block.

      There are options, and the options are better than Saras or DA, even if they are flawed.

      However, Tinsley's minutes keep going up, and his FGAs keep going up. Whether we like it or not, you've got to be in serious denial to think this is all Tinsley's doing without at least a passive (if not more) endorsement from the coach.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Rosen sees the obvious that Tinsley was taking horrible shots.
        We all see it, some just don't want to admit it. The coach has to be blamed to take away or deflect the blame away from Jamaal. Why did we get rid of AJ again? Atleast he made a better number of his shots, looked for better shots and didn't hoist up as many as Kobe.

        The number of shots and the quality of them is undefendable! Everyone knows DA is a stopgap, so what should Rick do again with Tinsley if he's shooting like a Gatling gun again? Who should he insert?

        Fair enough his second half was better. Too bad we were already down and out at that time.

        Regards,

        Mourning
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

          Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
          DunDUn needs glasses. He has good form and height to his shot but they were all off line, just a bit, unless he was further out from the rim. I remember they discovered this about George McGinnis when he went thru a horrid shooting slump (toward the end of his career IIRC). I'm only half kidding about his need for glasses.
          Didn't that seem to work for Charlie Sheen in Major League? Once he got glasses.....he looked like a poindexter.....but he was able to pitch correctly?

          If it worked in the movies.....maybe it will work in real life. Maybe you're onto something......
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

            Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
            He doesn't have to belittle them.

            If Tinsley isn't playing the way he wants, he has other choices.

            McLeod was a capable fill-in starter for Jerry Sloan.

            Orien Greene has been around the block.

            There are options, and the options are better than Saras or DA, even if they are flawed.
            how does it do us any good to play a guy that can't run an offense (greene) or a guy that has never really played within the pacers offense and hasn't played a game all season (mcleod)? i fail to see how those options are better than DA. now over time, we'll see what develops with those two (i am hoping mcleod turns out to be a solid player) but right now if we want our offense to run at all...
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

              Until I hear something that suggests otherwise, I'm just going to assume Rick is biting his tongue while we showcase Jamaal for a trade. It's the only way this makes sense to me.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                That's the question....why hasn't there as much movement among the players?

                More importantly...when did this start happening?

                We have played only 9 games since the trade....the 1st game without the new players....and the 3rd one ...without Tinsley. That would leave about 7 games to look at.

                For those that have the games TIVOd or taped....can someone figure out when this happened?

                My guess is that the ball-movement stopped happening...for one reason or another....once Marquis got injured...and progressively worse as Murphy got injured. I get the sense that Marquis ( either directly or indirectly ) has something to do with this.
                Well, ball movement has been an issue all season. We were fine in the first few games of the season, but it quickly changed.

                And since the trade, player movement stopped in the first game. You could see a decline as the players realized we didn't play that way. But it really, really became noticeable as early as the third game against the Knicks.

                It's strange because I still have the first Golden State game on "TiVO", and watching MDJ and Troy play for GS is completely different. The biggest difference in moving w/o the ball has been Dunleavy. He never stopped in GS, but he has here because there's little reason for him to move.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Until I hear something that suggests otherwise, I'm just going to assume Rick is biting his tongue while we showcase Jamaal for a trade. It's the only way this makes sense to me.
                  Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                    He doesn't have to belittle them.

                    If Tinsley isn't playing the way he wants, he has other choices.

                    McLeod was a capable fill-in starter for Jerry Sloan.

                    Orien Greene has been around the block.

                    There are options, and the options are better than Saras or DA, even if they are flawed.

                    However, Tinsley's minutes keep going up, and his FGAs keep going up. Whether we like it or not, you've got to be in serious denial to think this is all Tinsley's doing without at least a passive (if not more) endorsement from the coach.
                    I don't know if its realistic....but I came up with a few ways to minimize the impact that Tinsley's game has on the rest of the team ( assuming that he can't be traded....which probaly won't happen for another season or two )

                    1 ) Make Tinsley the backup PG...or cutback his minutes to 24 minutes a game but have him play the majority of his minutes with the backup players ( Rawle, Ike, Foster and Shawne ) so that he can freely score as much as he wants.
                    2 ) Use any combination of Marquis, Dunleavy and Armstrong to run the ball-handling and PG duties with the starting unit.
                    3 ) Pray that Marquis returns so that Carlisle isn't forced to play both Tinsley and Armstrong at the same time because Dunleavy is ineffective defending the SG.

                    I'm guessing that Option 1 is unlikely.....but there has to be something that Carlisle can do to minimize the impact that Tinsley has on how the offense is run with the Starters.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                      So, Tins breaks the plays, bad start, his fault to many shots:
                      (over the previous 4 games JT was 56% shooting adn 7 Ast avg)
                      So let's look at what really happend in the first half:

                      1st play: open pull-up JT : miss
                      2nd play: pass Dun > dribble > miss
                      3rd play: post-up JT kickout Murph > miss 3
                      4th play: post-up JT kickout JO miss
                      5th play: break, fake pass left, open jump miss
                      (9.30)
                      6th play: pass > Dun > DG miss
                      7th play: pass > JO > Dun > Murph > JO score
                      8th play: pass > DG > JO > travel
                      (7.30) 4-14 Time out
                      play not shown, miss
                      drive > lay-up > miss > JO reb > 2FT
                      break > Dun > DG > score
                      pass > Dun > JT > JO (foul 2T)
                      pass > JO score
                      Lob to Dun, missed
                      pass > Murph > JT > DG > miss
                      pass > DG > JO > score
                      pass > Dun miss 3
                      pass > Murph miss
                      Drive & Dish > JO fouled 2FT
                      3.01 JT out DA in 15-25
                      end of 1 : 18-34
                      2nd: 10.00 Time out 19-40
                      JT back in
                      pass > DA > JO miss
                      JT trips, > DA > Dun score
                      pass > JO > DA > JO > JT Drive layup
                      pass > DA > JO (st)
                      pass > DG 3
                      pass > DA > JO > DA > JT miss
                      JT clearance, layup score
                      pass > Dun miss
                      nreak Dun > DA score
                      JT Drive blocked
                      pass DG miss
                      pass > DA > Dun miss
                      pass > DG > JO > SW > JO (oob)
                      JT drive pull up score
                      Break dribble JT lost/recover/score
                      Break JT travel
                      pass > JO > JT miss 3
                      long pass DA score
                      pass > SW miss 3
                      drive JT blocked . JO (time out)
                      pass JO > JT > JO miss
                      pass > Mc > JO > Mc > JT > MC drive & loss
                      JT Drive & layup score
                      JT Drive fouled 2-2
                      JT Drive & Dish JO lost ball
                      JT Drive & Layup score (after reb bs)
                      JT Drive and layup score

                      idiotic 3 Ellis 42 - 65


                      So, between 10.00 in the 1st ( we're minus 10 here) and 3.01 in th 2nd we lose another 11 pts down.
                      We never recovered from that.
                      Most starters were out during that time.

                      For a "shoot first" I see a lot of "pass"

                      sometimes it helps seeing a replay.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                        and while at it let's add this from Pacers.com:

                        TRENDS
                        Darrell Armstrong has shot 8-of-46 from the 3-point line (.174) in his last 22 games and is 0-of-7 in his last four. Maceo Baston has hit 11 of his last 13 shots, including 2-of-2 from the arc. Ike Diogu has made all 15 of his free throws with the Pacers. Mike Dunleavy has averaged 9.6 points on .362 shooting in the last five. Jeff Foster has totaled 38 minutes, seven points, seven rebounds, eight fouls and four turnovers in the last two. Granger has averaged 17.0 points and 4.7 rebounds as a starter the last 10 games. Rawle Marshall has missed nine of his last 16 free-throw attempts. O'Neal has shot .383 from the field in the last eight. Jamaal Tinsley has averaged 21.8 points, 7.8 assists, 2.6 steals and .506 shooting in the last five.
                        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                          Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                          how does it do us any good to play a guy that can't run an offense (greene) or a guy that has never really played within the pacers offense and hasn't played a game all season (mcleod)? i fail to see how those options are better than DA. now over time, we'll see what develops with those two (i am hoping mcleod turns out to be a solid player) but right now if we want our offense to run at all...
                          With Dunleavy playing point-forward and running the offense, you could afford to have a backcourt of Daniels and Greene or Daniels and McLeod.

                          If Dunleavy is playing point-forward, you primarily need the PG to prevent dribble penetration and to provide assistance getting the ball into the front court if the other team is pressuring you. I assume that, unlike Saras, these two guys are capable ballhandlers even if they aren't great at running the offense (there is an important distinction there).

                          The only possible drawback to this is moving Granger back to the sixth-man role, but I think Granger is showing better assertiveness in that role. Its like he's too passive if he's on the court with JO - afraid to tip the scales.

                          DA makes a lot of mistakes - turnovers, ill-advised shots, defensive gambles - even if he hustles. If he's not able to play at an extraordinarily high energy level, he's a net-negative. And he's playing way too many minutes to sustain this level of performance. I fear what's going to happen in April if we don't develop either Greene or McLeod to take some of the pressure/ minutes off him now. This is about seeing the forest (building a team for the playoffs) instead of the trees (regular season games.)
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            To those ripping Tinsley's selfishness, you have to ask:

                            Why does the coach continue to allow it to happen?
                            As I've tried to explain Rick has no choice

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                              They added a vice president title when they extended his contract. I can not imagine Rick as the "helpless victim of Jamaal's selfish/ destructive play" here.

                              Maybe Rick was a "helpess victim" with Ron and SJax in the past, but his bosses figured out that undermining their own coach wasn't such a smart idea after all when they added the new title.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                                But his coach doesn't stop him.

                                I don't think any fan likes the way Tinsley is playing. He's capable of so much better play from a team perspective. But Rick gives every indication that Tinsley is transforming into the type of PG he wants.

                                Don't get me wrong, DA shoots far too often for my taste, too.

                                As I've said for a long time, I'd rather have Steve Francis and his contract if THIS is how Rick is going to use his PGs. Tinsley is not made to play this way, no matter how much Rick is trying to change him.

                                I find it funny that Charlie Rosen thinks he knows Rick's gameplan. We certainly can't find any/ many quotes from Rick criticizing Jamaal's play, so even if this isn't what Rick has in mind (and I believe this is exactly what he wants from Jamaal, just for Jamaal to shoot those shots at a higher percentage) he appears to be making a 0% effort to stop it.
                                Rick never criticizes any of his players in public. So the fact that we haven't seen or heard any quotes from Rick means nothing.


                                I'm shocked that you honestly think that Rick wants JT to take those shots. Are you really serious, or just trying to make a point. I realize you have very little respect for Rick, but please.

                                I'll repeat it again. Rick has been backed into a corner with Tinsley - Rick has no other choice. If he criticizes JT he'll sit out 5 games for some unknown sickness.


                                Really though I could take Tinsley at the offensive end, selfishness and all, poor shots and all - if he even tried to play defense. yes that is right I don't think he often tries to play defense. He often gives one effort and then he packs it in for the possession - he rarely if ever makes a second or third effort or a consistant 24 seconds of defense.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X