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

Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

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

  • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    I missed this. Lakers?
    I meant this in the sense that he compliments decent offensive players well enough (Hansbrough, as we know by now, does not). Good passer, keeps the ball moving, decent off-ball movement and passable rebounding. However, his lack of scoring, bad shooting etc... wouldn't really upgrade an already offensively-inept bench. But then neither does hansbrough so...

    Comment


    • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

      Originally posted by billbradley View Post

      Debating the better NBA player between Josh and Tyler is like debating the tallest midget.


      LOL! I needed that laugh today.

      Comment


      • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

        Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
        Who? I thought be got big while Melo (and Amare?) were out?
        Talking about the Lakers coach Dantoni

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        Pendergraph's chance should have come before we used a 1st round pick on a 24 year old rookie.

        At this point, despite what I think of him as player, Plumlee absolutely should get the nod ahead of Pendergraph.
        While the logic is sound I disagree(this logic is the reason Tyler has got so much burn and proved he cant play. You invest so much in a lottery pick you have to see him play is the thinking)

        We have more money invest in Pendagraph than Plumlee (Pendy at 3m last year and this year,Plumlee at closer to 2m counting not counting his option years)

        If he cant play like Tyler I dont want to waste minutes. I do agree I would rather him than Tyler ,but give Pendy a shot first he is in a contract year and healthy lets see if he can play like he did in college. Where he was an elite garbage man and good screener. He even had a jumper back then hell maybe it can come back. I just feel bad for the guy injury after injury.

        I mean Daniel Orton was drafted in a similar spot and sucked I would of been pissed (if I was a Magic fan) if they gave him minutes. Draft position only matters for so long. But I do agree he will get his chance just like Tyler did because he was a 1st rd pick. I just hope it happens after Pendy gets his.

        But I do agree with Plumlee's screen setting ability it's pretty good(mostly because he isnt a threat to score which he knows so he focuses on the screen) even if he doesn't like contact. Outside of screening Plumlee cant do anything else terrible awareness on both ends. Terrible PnR defense and help defense. I mean he does get easy rebounds but he rarely gets big boy rebounds that a guy of his size and "athletic ability" should. Pendy loves the contact which is why I think he is a really good screener also why he picks up a lot of fouls on screens.

        Comment


        • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
          I hope it works, but I won't be surprised if it doesn't.
          How will you be able to tell if it doesn't work? Will the shooting, passing, offense and defense somehow get worse?

          I came "this" close to going up to Pritchard in GSW and talking to him about the surprising disappointment of Augustin (he was about 4 rows behind us).


          I liked Ben at ND and believe in his "gamer" intangibles at the PG spot. He's more Woody/JJack than physically gifted, but that can work if you are talking 2nd string, limited minutes and lower expectations. I feel like Ben has always shown an understanding of what is needed from him on the court in varied circumstances.

          At worst he'll be terrible on defense, ice cold on shooting and completely stifled whenever he tries to execute the most basic PnR, and he'll still cost less than DJ. How's that hurt?

          Comment


          • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I don't expect much from Ben, but Augustin has been beyond horrible so I doubt it can be much worse. I will probably never understand what is going on with Augustin, he's better than he's shown. Plus he's on a 1 year contract, so I just don't understand. I have seen Frank very frustrated a lot by Augustin's play.
            The contract year angle makes the uninspired play a lot more confounding. To me DJ literally looks stumped by the game, like the Vogel gameplan just confuses him. So many PnRs where he just gets trapped to the side with no ability to make a return pass to the roll/pop player and no ability to make effective penetration (ie, can get a shot or pass out of it).

            Hill should not be a better passer than DJ, but he has been.

            He's wrecking his own career. I feel bad seeing it happen because I don't dislike him and was really happy that he was signed. But in the end you've got to produce to win the fans and the PT.

            Comment


            • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              How will you be able to tell if it doesn't work? Will the shooting, passing, offense and defense somehow get worse?
              Good point, I didn't clarify that when I say i hope it works, it working means there is an improvement. If there is no noticeable difference then it didn't work. If Ben is able to just shoot 40%, or just play mediocre defense it has worked, while not turning the ball over.

              Comment


              • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                Who? I thought be got big while Melo (and Amare?) were out?
                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                How will you be able to tell if it doesn't work? Will the shooting, passing, offense and defense somehow get worse?

                I came "this" close to going up to Pritchard in GSW and talking to him about the surprising disappointment of Augustin (he was about 4 rows behind us).


                I liked Ben at ND and believe in his "gamer" intangibles at the PG spot. He's more Woody/JJack than physically gifted, but that can work if you are talking 2nd string, limited minutes and lower expectations. I feel like Ben has always shown an understanding of what is needed from him on the court in varied circumstances.

                At worst he'll be terrible on defense, ice cold on shooting and completely stifled whenever he tries to execute the most basic PnR, and he'll still cost less than DJ. How's that hurt?
                Thats likley what he will be IMO and if thats the case he will be cut. DJ is a sunk cost while Ben is not if he is at DJ's level which is likely IMO he is cut. Im guessing this move is coming from the FO just to decide weather to keep Ben or not which isnt a bad play at all with how bad DJ has been. If Ben surprises we have a cheap backup who is going to stay if he is about as bad as DJ (which is likely) he goes.

                Comment


                • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                  Someone has to score. Someone has to get assists.
                  No they don't. You don't "have" to do anything at a productive level.

                  Plus I love how the idea that you benefit from playing with a Jordan, Shaq, Bird or Magic suddenly goes right out the door when slamming a player with good numbers on a bad team (ie, not just accumlated points on volume with a terrible FG%).

                  See, Jordan made the players around him better, made them have better numbers. But also playing with the anti-Jordans of the world make you better because you have to do it all for yourself.

                  It's a contradiction that drifts into blatent stupidity. The logic is dreadful. Pick a freaking side, pick a view and stick with it. You get better numbers by playing on a bad team or by playing on a good team, but not both. It's classic conspiracy type of logic that twists to whatever opinion the person wants to support at the moment.

                  Kobe goes out which means that random backup SG will start scoring 35 a night....you know, because SOMEONE has to get the those free numbers the NBA just hands out after the game. They just have a pre-set pool of stats to distribute as they see fit, you don't actually have to make baskets or take away rebounds against good players to earn them.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    Good point, I didn't clarify that when I say i hope it works, it working means there is an improvement. If there is no noticeable difference then it didn't work. If Ben is able to just shoot 40%, or just play mediocre defense it has worked, while not turning the ball over.
                    I agree and this is my expectation. I think ball movement and general floor movement will be better because Ben has shown a great sense for that. I think he will pick his shots a bit better, or at least be able to execute some of the mids better, and thus will be able to keep a 43% range 2pt game. All of that should pan into a couple of assists. Not beauties with gifted touch or nasty xover shake and bakes, but DJ wasn't utilizing his own handles very well so that's a moot issue.

                    Ben should be a bit more of a gamer on defense, especially off the initial PG attack, and should be able to slow people up enough to actually get some help there in time. Plus he'll have much better defensive awareness which should result in some helpful block outs or return pass coverage against the man who the helper had to leave (DJ just leaves the help defender out to dry often).


                    If they could get Gerald more of the iso setups and let Young focus on floating for scraps and defense they should be able to step up some of the bench offense a bit.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                      While the logic is sound I disagree(this logic is the reason Tyler has got so much burn and proved he cant play. You invest so much in a lottery pick you have to see him play is the thinking)

                      We have more money invest in Pendagraph than Plumlee (Pendy at 3m last year and this year,Plumlee at closer to 2m counting not counting his option years)

                      If he cant play like Tyler I dont want to waste minutes. I do agree I would rather him than Tyler ,but give Pendy a shot first he is in a contract year and healthy lets see if he can play like he did in college. Where he was an elite garbage man and good screener. He even had a jumper back then hell maybe it can come back. I just feel bad for the guy injury after injury.

                      I mean Daniel Orton was drafted in a similar spot and sucked I would of been pissed (if I was a Magic fan) if they gave him minutes. Draft position only matters for so long. But I do agree he will get his chance just like Tyler did because he was a 1st rd pick. I just hope it happens after Pendy gets his.

                      But I do agree with Plumlee's screen setting ability it's pretty good(mostly because he isnt a threat to score which he knows so he focuses on the screen) even if he doesn't like contact. Outside of screening Plumlee cant do anything else terrible awareness on both ends. Terrible PnR defense and help defense. I mean he does get easy rebounds but he rarely gets big boy rebounds that a guy of his size and "athletic ability" should. Pendy loves the contact which is why I think he is a really good screener also why he picks up a lot of fouls on screens.
                      I'll trust your judgment on Pendergaph. I haven't seen anything out of him, admittedly in extremely limited time, but I don't expect much from Plumlee either. I'm just of the opinion that if you're going to use a 1st round pick on an older rookie, and they don't get much older than Plumlee, he better show you he can contribute sooner rather than later.

                      Of course, I've seen Plumlee for 4 seasons of college ball with basically nothing showing he's ready to contribute.

                      Just give one of them a shot. Either one. I don't care.
                      Last edited by BRushWithDeath; 12-11-2012, 12:59 PM.
                      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                      -Lance Stephenson

                      Comment


                      • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        See, Jordan made the players around him better, made them have better numbers. But also playing with the anti-Jordans of the world make you better because you have to do it all for yourself.
                        I think you are twisting the argument. Putting up better stats because you are the best player on a bad team doesn't mean you were better because of it. Instead it just means you were the only half-decent option on a team with few to no decent options. At the level of the NBA (which is extremely important to this argument), most players are good enough that if you build the offense around that player they can put up a decent amount of points or assists. The difference between those players and a player like Kobe, is their scoring is usually inefficient, and thus does not help the team to be much better.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                          While I agree that Augustin and Tyler have not done well this year and I'm ready to make a move to Ben and Pendergraf, I must say that both DJ and Tyler have always played better when getting more minutes. They both seem to have trouble getting into the rhythm of the game in the short time they are out there. However, I also don't believer that either of them are good enough to be starters in this league. It's strange how some players are better able to adjust to coming off the bench than others.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                            Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                            You can always count on Mack and Brush to show up when there's some Tyler bashing to be had.
                            And me. And the results, ie stats.

                            16% of Tylers DUNKS HAVE BEEN BLOCKED (per 82 games). Frontline bigs get almost none of their dunk attempts blocked. Tip backs, contested shots at the rim, etc, sure you'll see those sent back. But there's a reason Roy getting stuffed by W'brook made the highlight rounds. PFs are not supposed to get stuffed on power moves.

                            And if there was a stat for most shots blocked literally right back down toward the floor, or within 45 degrees of straight down, Tyler would lead that stat as well.


                            Tyler does one thing well - draws FTAs. And as the refs have grown used to his motion and style we've seen his offensive fouls and travels going upward and the foul calls starting to dip. Activity for activity's sake is not a skill. Activity needs to be paired with a purpose.



                            Tyler and Ben are not the same player; they aren't even the PG and PF versions of each other. Ben succeeds in ways that Tyler does not. Ben shows much higher awareness, not as much always-on motor. Tyler has strength and decent lateral movement for a PF while Ben doesn't have any particular physical gift greater than the standard backup PG.

                            But Ben's awareness at PG has greater value than Tyler's out of control (lack of purpose) banging at PF.



                            And since the Josh battle is back raging, the P36 from this season (EDIT - these are CAREER NUMBERS, MY MISTAKE) suggests it's not that close. One is a quality backup PF, one is teetering on being out of the league.

                            FG%/eFG%
                            Tyler 42% / 42%
                            Josh 51% / 54%
                            Yet Tyler insists on taking 5 more shots every 36 minutes

                            REB
                            Tyler 8.3
                            Josh 8.7

                            AST
                            Tyler 1.0
                            Josh 3.0

                            Blocks
                            Tyler 0.3
                            Josh 1.2

                            STL
                            Tyler 1.1
                            Josh 1.0

                            TOs/Fouls
                            1.7 / 4.0
                            1.8 / 4.0

                            Tyler stands out soley on the extra 4 FTAs/FTMs per game. That's something, but it's not really what you want from a PF. And even with the extra FTs Tyler doesn't win the Points Per FGA battle - 1.24 TH, 1.26 JM


                            And this doesn't even directly address the clear intangible advantage a team gets with a PF that can go backdoor for the oop if a team cheats him too much.


                            New year and the stats keep telling the EXACT SAME STORY (edit - of course they do if you mistakenly use the career numbers, duh). And no, a guy getting 8.3 per 36 is not about to average a double double if he gets 32-36 minutes. The math says it's not close, and the idea that energy-based players in limited minutes will just keep producing the same level no matter is just flat-out wrong. Players get tired and their production p36 goes down, thus the idea of not extrapolating the output of an 8 mpg guy vs a 28 mpg guy. The Per36 is meant to compare guys with similar levels of PT, guys in the same ballpark and type of role.

                            Now Blair, the guy pulling down 11.3 reb P36, he might average a double double. Or Gibson and his 9.5 p36. Heck, Booker is at 8.7 p36 and has a 53% FG. Booker and Blair even have height disadvantages and are doing this. Of course they all have the advantage of playing 20-23 mpg whereas Tyler is stuck at just 20 mpg (wait, what, I thought Frank was screwing him over).



                            I hate this debate so much. I hate that it even has to be had, but clearly it still does (for the sake of upholding reality).

                            I don't get how fans (not just Pacers fans) love Tyler's game and are meh about the likes of Trevor Booker. There are TONS of 20 mpg backup PFs that make a lot more shots and rebound more per minutes (without the help of their own misses no less).
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 12-11-2012, 03:20 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                              I think you are twisting the argument. Putting up better stats because you are the best player on a bad team doesn't mean you were better because of it. Instead it just means you were the only half-decent option on a team with few to no decent options. At the level of the NBA (which is extremely important to this argument), most players are good enough that if you build the offense around that player they can put up a decent amount of points or assists. The difference between those players and a player like Kobe, is their scoring is usually inefficient, and thus does not help the team to be much better.
                              But if you can make a good FG% while being double teamed and having to do all the work isn't that harder than hitting open jumpers that Jordan sets you up for?


                              You don't get 10 rebounds automatically just by being out there. If you have a team of 5 "mes" none of them are going to get 10 rebounds just because someone has to. All of the "mes" are going to get their a***** handed to them in every way. I might not shoot 20% and as a team we might not score 30 points, maybe not even 15.

                              But if it's me with Bird, Magic and Jordan and all I have to do is wait for the open mid-range shot, suddenly I'm at 35% and maybe even scoring 8 a night.


                              The only "accumulate" stat is Points because you can simply take every single shot and some of them are bound to go in even if they are halfcourt miracles. So to me Iverson was overrated because his point total was too much of a focal point while his poor FG% and dominance of the shots hurt his team. But he still had to do a bunch of that work on his own and it's likely that were he to play with Shaq in his prime that all his numbers would have improved simply by sharing the load.


                              Think about DJ in Charlotte. Every trip you must do everything, you must get free of teams that double you all the time and try to get assists with guys that can make a jump shot. You must get rebounds even though guys aren't blocking out well and aren't strong at contesting rebounds in the first place. This is easier than having Foster bat at a ball that ends up bouncing out to you for the rebound off the floor?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Augustin demoted to 3rd PG, Hansbrough new Backup

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                                Tyler does one thing well - draws FTAs. And as the refs have grown used to his motion and style we've seen his offensive fouls and travels going upward and the foul calls starting to dip. Activity for activity's sake is not a skill. Activity needs to be paired with a purpose.

                                Tyler stands out soley on the extra 4 FTAs/FTMs per game. That's something, but it's not really what you want from a PF. And even with the extra FTs Tyler doesn't win the Points Per FGA battle - 1.24 TH, 1.26 JM
                                Couple of thoughts:

                                1-Damn, those stats. Didn't realize that a) Tyler was producing so inefficiently, and b) Josh is actually producing anything.

                                2-The one thing that Tyler "solely" does is pretty important though. No one else on this team gets to the line with any kind of regularity, and it's always nice when Tyler comes in and mucks things up, forcing a team to crash down and foul.

                                3-Your final sentence really shows why neither of these guys are very useful: awful PPFGA.

                                Good post though. I like using facts to bring clarity to a debate. However, the nice thing about Tyler is that he really does spark this team (Case in point, the Washington game).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X