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:
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

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

What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

    So I've made my annual trip to Indy. I have tickets for the Memphis game on Wednesday. I don't know if this is the best or worst of all possible times to come see a Pacers game. We'll find out soon enough.

    I've been thinking about what I would do if I were Jim O'Brien. Here's what I come up with:

    Starting Lineup:

    PG - AJ Price - Neither Ford nor Watson is playing at a very high level right now. AJ looks good in practice, right?

    SG - Luther Head - He's been our best guard over the last several games. He'll get killed by big 2's on the defensive end, but I'm going to have him take it right at those guys on offense and see what happens. He's also the first guy I'm subbing out.

    SF - Brandon Rush - Brandon's looked better lately. He's our best perimeter defender and, I think, slightly better at guarding 3s than D. Jones.

    PF/C - Tyler Hansbrough - He's the hardest working player on the team, and is probably quickly becoming the most popular for the game-watching casual fan. He's also acheiving a decent amount of success on the court.

    PF/C - Troy Murphy - Everybody's favorite punching bag is actually playing well lately. He's been the best vet by far over the past 5 or so games. I start him for two reasons: his play warrants it, and I want to send a message to the other vets. Also, the defense has shown the ability to function well with one unathletic player (see early season win streak w/ Hibbert), for now I'm choosing Troy.


    Dahntay is the first man off the bench and he's coming in for Head.

    I'm bringing Dunleavy in for 2-3 5-6 minutes stretches each game. When he's in the game he's ordered to never stop moving on offense and to never try and create off the dribble. I'm also making sure he's always in the game with Hibbert or Solo and never with Murphy.

    Ford/Watson - If Price plays moderately well he's getting 30+ mpg. For the other PG minutes, I'm going with what the team needs: Ford for offense, Watson for defense. I'm probably not going to play a 2 PG backcourt, but if I do it's not going to be Watson/Price.


    Hansbrough is getting as many minutes as possible.

    I'm rotating Murphy and Hibbert, trying to get about 24 mpg for both. I'm never, ever playing them together again.

    I'll play Solo and McBob every game at both positions.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  • #2
    Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

    sounds good, and yes, murphy has been good on offense, but doesnt his defense worry you a bit? the past few games have been a dunk/layup fest for opposing bigs because of his utter inability to protect the post...or anything for that matter. id prefer having somebody whos more solid and constant on defense. (hibbert/solo)
    follow me @TruenoPanda - lets talk Pacers!


    • #3
      Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

      I would be a little more inclined to something like this, but it's still a reach.


      • #4
        Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

        Originally posted by mellifluous View Post

        Dahntay is the first man off the bench and he's coming in for Head.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.


        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

        -John Wooden


        • #5
          Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

          I like your line-up, but I do not value the same players. I think these guys could at least get us off on a good start early, but mostly I don't care who starts. It is the minute distribution I'd like to see. Over the next 15 games you should know who really is the best. Watson deserves more minutes, but who cares, he's gone next year anyway.

          To start;

          PG- TJ Ford(24 min.) - Yeah, say what you want he's the best we have.
          SG- Head(24 min) - Ball-handling and shooting, dribble drives.
          SF- Rush(24 min) - Best defender on the team, spot up shooter.
          PF- Hansbro(30 min) - Because he deserves it.
          C - Murphy(32 min) - Because all our centers get lit up anyway.

          Sixth man - Dunleavy(24 min)

          Reserve minutes;
          Hibbert(18 min), Dahntay(24 min), Watson(16 min), Price(8 min), McRob(16 min), Solo(whatever is spared by foul trouble).

          Foster, Diener, Granger


          • #6
            Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

            I'd like to see Head get some extended minutes. He kind of reminds me of M Daniels with another gear.
            "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetimeís worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."


            • #7
              Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

              Eh. I hate the lineup, but perhaps no more than the other lineups we've run with.
              This space for rent.


              • #8
                Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                Only thing I'd change is the center. Really, a Tyler/Murphy frontcourt spells trouble. Put Hibbert or Solo there, IMO.


                • #9
                  Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                  What starting big man set doesn't spell trouble?


                  • #10
                    Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                    Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
                    What starting big man set doesn't spell trouble?
                    I actually don't think Tyler and Hibbert would be too bad. Or at least it's the best pairing.

                    Tyler's a decent defender, he's quick. And he can score. He brings a lot of energy to the team.

                    Hibbert's a good offensive player. I think JOB, or anyone could come up with a better defensive scheme...and and gun is an awful system for Hibbert too..but to be perfectly honest, paired with Price, Hibbert would be fine because Price is going to want to play the PnR and Hibbet can play that well, especially with AJ. *As we saw in the summer league*

                    Murphy wouldn't be bad to have off the bench either. Especially if you needed some points. But if he's coming in. He's coming in with Solo. Tyler and Murphy is just too small of a front court. And Hibbert and Roy are just too pathetic defensively. So bring in Murphy and Solo at the same time.

                    JOB completely ignores who should play with whom. You need a balance, and you need players with good on court chemistry. The only two that JOB consistently puts together is TJ and Murphy, who clearly do have chemistry. Granted anyone with half a brain would sit them both on the bench. Who cares if you compliment each other, if both of you hurt the team when you are in. Some players just play really well together, and sometimes there's really logical reasons to put two players together *Murph and Solo*

                    And from Summer league and the games we've seen several different things.

                    Rush and TJ can't play together.
                    Watson and DJones can't play together.
                    Dunleavy, when he doesn't look dead, plays well with every besides TJ.
                    AJ has also played fine with everyone besides TJ. Granted we haven't seen too much of him to know.. But through summerleague we saw that he played especially well with Hibbert and Hansborough.
                    It doesnt' matter whose in with Head. There doesn't seem to be much either way. There's postives and negatives to playing them with Watson or Ford. Play Head with Ford, and Ford won't completely be able to ball dominate. And when Ford does dribble to far in and needs to be bailed out Head's a good shooter. But that backcourt is terrible defensively. Which is why Watson and Head are good together. Nice mix of offense and defense.

                    I could continue on..I think this stuff is pretty logical..but we keep getting lineups of either Watson, DJones, a dying Dun, Tyler and Solo, or TJ, Head, Rush, Murphy, Hibbert. It doesn't make any sense, really.

                    This team doesn't have any stars with Granger hurt. These players are all about the same, so it's especially important to play good combos.

                    Personally, my lineup would be Price, DJones, Rush, Hansborough, Hibbert.
                    Backups: Head, Dun in spurts, Murphy, Solo, Watson.

                    Price, can play with most combinations, with the exception of forcing him to play SG with TJ. *He can do that pretty well with Watson* He's probably the best all around PG on the team. He can play the PnR the best. He can go fast, but not out of control. He's solid defensively. And he doesn't do stupid stuff. He's also got the PG mentality.

                    DJones over Head for starting SG for a couple of reasons. With other offensive players on the court *Price, Hansborough, Hibbert, and Rush depending upon the day* So the defense of the other team won't be focused on him. And he's one of the best defenders on the team. Plus, I think having DJones out there with the younger guys isn't a bad idea. He's been the best veteran leader so far.

                    Rush, I would think it would be better to go with a Price, Jones, Rush, backcourt, rather than a Price, Head, Jones backcourt. This backcourt is bigger, and it's better defensively. Head also can't do anything that Rush can't do, if Rush is aggressive. But I think with Price he'll get a more systematic offense, which will help Rush.

                    Hansborough. I think this one is fairly obvious. Between the energy and offense he brings. The fact that other teams hate playing with him. The fact that in summerleague he did really well with Hibbert and Price. The fact that he's not Murphy....

                    And Hibbert. Like I said at the begining. Hibbert and Hans have the possibility of being a decent front court.

           obviously go with the flow of the game, which JOB can not do or does not do. He makes the same subs pretty much every game. *Rush in at the 6 minute, Ford in at the Four minute mark, of the first quarter..I really think that's why he struggled to find Price minutes, and just forgot that idea. That wasn't how his system worked.*

                    If the team needs a little more offense, you put Head in for DJones or Rush. If you want to bring in Murph, bring in Solo with him. Don't leave Hibbert on the court with TJ, Head, Dun, and Murphy, because he's sure to pick up foul trouble ect...This is just logic with player abilities, and reacting to what you need in the game.

                    Sorry *rant over*


                    • #11
                      Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                      I've always been a fan of "traditional" basketball, i.e., PG's run the offense and distribute the ball more than they score, Centers and PFs do most of their dirty work around the basket, SGs as your primary deep ball threat and SFs as your primary defensive stopper and mid-range jump shooter. Where are the traditionalist among the available starters on this Pacers team?

                      Hibbert is a proto-typical Center who still needs time to develop. He's a keeper.

                      Murphy does not play underneath the basket whether at PF or Center. As consistent as he's been, he's not a shoot blocker and is rather ineffective in defending the paint. So, from a traditionalist point of view, I'd look to trade him.

                      TJ Ford would rather score the ball than pass it. His only real asset is his ability to push the tempo and take his man off the dribble. You need those traits in a PG, but you need him to setup the offense more. To that, Ford doesn't fit my view of a traditionalist either.

                      Dunleavy...bless his heart. He's trying, but he's no defensive stopper. Furthermore, his offense sucks big time right now and there's nothing I can point my finger at as to why he's struggling other than maybe it's taking him alot longer to adjust to playing on his "reconstructed" knee after playing one a bad one for so long. But for what it's worth, I'd still take a healthy Dunleavy from a year or two ago than the one we're left with now. Get it together, man!

                      BRush...what can I say? He's still green, but he has been playing much better of late. He has finally settled down and isn't trying to do too much out there. Still, a pure shooter he is not. But for the sake of future growth and development, I'd hold onto him until something better came along.

                      So, what would I do in an attempt to turn things around? Identify the more traditional players at their relative positions and play them!

                      PG - TJ Ford and AJ Price. You want to push the tempo? Then do it! Go all out with it from now on. This isn't a demotion to Watson, but rather finally committing to remaining true to the style of play you want for the team. So, if it's uptempo, make it so!!! Earl Watson's a fine PG. In fact, he plays more of the traditional PG role that I like. However, he's more of a half-court PG. It's for this reason I'd sit him out and use him only when you really want/need to slow the game down. (BTW, I wonder when Diener's due to return? I like his play as well, but I'm beginning to wonder if he'll ever get out of street clothes.)

                      Center - Hibbert is our man, but he doesn't have a legitimate backup. By playing Solo or Murphy at Center, you're really forcing the issue and playing both out of position. But what choice does JOB have with Foster constantly in and out of the lineup with back problems?

                      PF - I'd start Hansborough. Yes, he's a rookie, but he's shown he will not back down from anyone. He's tough, scrappy and goes all-out on every possession. Take advantage of it from the first tic off the game clock. Start him! And bring Murphy off the bench.

                      SG - Until Granger returns, I'd stick with BRush at starting SG. As I stated above, he's finally starting to settle down and let the game come to him. He's not trying to do too much and his decision making has gotten better. Tough it out with him at SG for alittle while longer.

                      SF - This probably the 2nd most screwed up position for the Pacers right now. Dahntay's not the defensive stopper we were led to believe. (Kinda like Kareem Rush was suppose to be the "shooter" the team needed a few years ago. How's that working out for us, Bird? Oh! That's right...we got rid of the big brother in favor of his little brother. What an upgrade? Yeah, I'm still 50/50 on BRush despite giving him props herein. But I'll openly admit that defensively, BRush is much better than his older brother in that regard. Neither are pure shooters, though.) Dunleavy is okay as long as he's not defending someone quicker or taller than he, but he's no real defensive stopper either. I hate to say it, but I really do miss Ron-Ron in that regard...not the nutcase, but the great defender he was here. I know alot of folks believe Granger should be at this position and maybe you're right, but based on the makeup of this team, I think Granger fits better at SG than SF ONLY because this team still has problems stopping the opposing team's best scorers at the point of attack - the Guards. Plus, Granger's the best 3-pt threat we have.


                      C - Hibbert/Foster/Solo
                      PF - Hansborough/Murphy/McRoberts
                      PG - TJ Ford/AJ Price/Watson/Diener*
                      SG - Granger/BRush/Head
                      SF - Dahntay/Dunleavy

                      *I'd actually play Diener behind TJ is he were healthy.

                      I'd said it before and I'll say it again: Put your best players forward at their relative positions whether veterans or rookies. That's a winning forumula more often than not. I do understand JOB has his work cut out for him. He has a roster full of rookies and newbies, he's dealing with constant injuries, and he has yet to have his ideal starters together once this year. But at this point, I think he has to see the reality of the situation. Certain players (starters) aren't getting the job done out there. (Once Granger returns and assuming no one else gets injured...) It's time to put the best players forward at their relative positions and just see what happens. It can't get much worse!!!


                      • #12
                        Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                        Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post


                        C - Hibbert/Foster/Solo
                        PF - Hansborough/Murphy/McRoberts
                        PG - TJ Ford/AJ Price/Watson/Diener*
                        SG - Granger/BRush/Head
                        SF - Dahntay/Dunleavy

                        *I'd actually play Diener behind TJ is he were healthy.
                        Can't argue with this much. Not sure I'd have TJ at the top, I think he plays better off the bench and I think Watson distributes better which is good for Roy and Hans, but it seems a solid rotation that moves Murphy out of the starting lineup.

                        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...


                        • #13
                          Re: What I Would Do (If Anybody Cares)

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Can't argue with this much. Not sure I'd have TJ at the top, I think he plays better off the bench and I think Watson distributes better which is good for Roy and Hans, but it seems a solid rotation that moves Murphy out of the starting lineup.
                          The idea is to play to the team's one true strength - pushing the tempo - while also capitalizing on two things this team either needs to do a much better job at or maintain a level consistency in performance:

                          1. Interior defense.

                          2. Maintain scoring among the reserves.

                          It's very clear to me that JOB has all of our energy players slanted to the 2nd Unit. Earlier immediately following the 5-game winning streak, we needed that among the reserves because it was the 2nd Unit that was faltering. But now, all the energy, movement and aggressiveness seems to be with the reserves. JOB still hasn't found that balance this team desperately needs. But that's due more to injuries; depth is no longer at a premium.

                          As to the PG situation, I'd like Watson to run the Point, too, but he doesn't push the tempo the way TJ, Diener or even AJ does. What he does bring to that position better than all others except maybe Diener is his ability to keep is turnovers low and is a pass-first PG. That's why I'm personally disappointed that it's taking so long (purposely, is my guess) for Diener to get back on the court.