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

Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

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

  • #91
    Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    He's a bad individual rebounder and a good team rebounder. That's why I continually show how the Pacers rebound as a team. Not to say that Roy is as good as Dwight, but to show that a Pacer not named Roy is actually getting the rebound. I couldn't care less if Roy got the rebound, or CJ Watson. As long as the Pacers are one of the best NBA teams rebounding, who gets the rebound is irrelevant.

    That's why I've asked, twice, which player would we like to see Roy take rebounds from? If Roy needs to rebound more, and the Pacers are the best defensive rebounding team based on %, that means for every one rebound Roy doesn't get is most likely going to mean another player is going to have one less.

    So which player should see his rebounding numbers dip, in order for Roy to get more? Rebounds are a finite stat. You can't just add to one player without subtracting from another.
    I want the Pacers to be #1 in rebounding. Not asking them to take from anyone but the other team.

    I want improvement on the offensive glass for a team that shoots a low %.

    Pacers are 20th in offensive rebounding.

    http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/te...ensiveRebounds


    If were gonna toss up bricks lets get in the top 10 on the offensive glass. So you tell me who is going to do it between the $27,000,000 dollar starting front court at this point.

    Or does G Hill gotta do it all??
    Last edited by PacersPride; 03-27-2015, 07:37 PM.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

      Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
      I want the Pacers to be #1 in rebounding. Not asking them to take from anyone but the other team.

      I want improvement on the offensive glass for a team that shoots a low %.

      Pacers are 20th in offensive rebounding.

      http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/te...ensiveRebounds


      If were gonna toss up bricks lets get in the top 10 on the offensive glass. So you tell me who is going to do it between the $27,000,000 dollar starting front court at this point.

      Or does G Hill gotta do it all??
      Thats where I believe Roy's biggest decline has been at the offensive rebounding imo, also the team as well.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

        Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
        Who is Roy...

        Offense- Roy has a decent post game. While normally guards are more likely to be called streaky, this could be applied to Roy's hook shot. He will go through stretches where he has full confidence in his shot, hen there are times it looks like he is throwing a softball at the basket. Overall he is a decent 3rd or 4th option to have on the floor. Career 12ish points per game.

        Defense- Roy is a top five defensive big man. He is an elite rim protector. He alters shots and alters game plans, including the best player on the planet. In the post, I would call him above average, but not elite. He is really big, but his high center of balance allows him to be backed down a bit. Overall he is really good at defending while not fouling. This category is why Roy is worth 15 million dollars.

        Rebounding- average. We have seen Roy try, with mixed results. Because of this, Frank has Roy put a body on somebody. If the ball comes his way, he grabs it. If not, he takes off for the other side.
        This is exactly how I see Roy and imo is objectively true, Roy has never shown consistency on offense which is why I've never put much thought into his offense. I see it more as a bonus if he scores more than 10pts.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

          In reality Roy's interior defense is only as effective as the guards who defend out on the perimeter. When they play good defense, then Roy has a chance to set up in the paint.
          Roy by himself as a defender is not very effective, given how he gets punked in the post by the opposing teams bigs, and he doesn't bother to leave the paint to close out on stretch 4's and 5's. He is not an elite post defender, he is tall, and takes up room in the paint.

          That right there is why he isn't worth 15 mil. Shame on Larry Bird if he ends up giving this guy another big contract.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            I have only ever claimed Roy to be an average rebounder
            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Okay since86 & Eleazar we'll just cut the B.S. from everyone.

            What is your opinion of Roy Hibbert as a rebounder? Use whatever reasoning you like to make your case.
            I already said.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              Sorry I guess I didn't answer this one myself. I would like to see Roy grab rebounds from any wing or guard so that we could attempt an outlet pass to get some form of fast break going. We struggle mightily to score in the half court and I would like to see us get some breaks going.
              The Pacers aren't a bad fastbreak team because of who is rebounding the basketball. Those problems aren't fixed merely by changing the rebounder.


              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              Also can I ask you a question here. What makes you say he is a good team rebounder and not that the team understands he is a bad rebounder so they change up their style to make up for his lack of rebounding. That btw, is an honest question and not a set up or anything.
              Because the Pacers have been a top rebounding team with Roy at center over the last 5-6 years? Vogel has said, multipe times, that the rebounding philsophy is for Roy to box out and for the wings to crash. They're executing the game plan the way they're being told to do so, and you're not happy.

              Not happy that the Pacers are a top rebounding team, because one player isn't getting his "fair share."

              The leading individual rebounder in the NBA is on one of the worst team reabounding teams in the league.

              Would you swap out Roy getting more rebounds if it made the Pacers a worse rebounding team? Not saying it would, but I think it's interesting that you're more worried about whether or not Roy gets X amount of rebounds, rather than being happy with the fact that the Pacers are, and have been, atop the NBA in rebounding for so long.

              And that's the difference between our positions. I look at whether or not the team does good, the ones complaining look solely about whether or not Roy does good. That's why we have *****ing about Roy while the Pacers outrebounded the Bucks by 12. The team is more important than Roy, IMHO.
              Last edited by Since86; 03-30-2015, 09:26 AM.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                The Pacers aren't a bad fastbreak team because of who is rebounding the basketball. Those problems aren't fixed merely by changing the rebounder.




                Because the Pacers have been a top rebounding team with Roy at center over the last 5-6 years? Vogel has said, multipe times, that the rebounding philsophy is for Roy to box out and for the wings to crash. They're executing the game plan the way they're being told to do so, and you're not happy.

                Not happy that the Pacers are a top rebounding team, because one player isn't getting his "fair share."

                The leading individual rebounder in the NBA is on one of the worst team reabounding teams in the league.

                Would you swap out Roy getting more rebounds if it made the Pacers a worse rebounding team? Not saying it would, but I think it's interesting that you're more worried about whether or not Roy gets X amount of rebounds, rather than being happy with the fact that the Pacers are, and have been, atop the NBA in rebounding for so long.

                And that's the difference between our positions. I look at whether or not the team does good, the ones complaining look solely about whether or not Roy does good. That's why we have *****ing about Roy while the Pacers outrebounded the Bucks by 12. The team is more important than Roy, IMHO.
                Will state it again.


                Pacers are 20th in offensive rebounding.

                http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/te...ensiveRebounds


                Albeit the pacers are a good rebounding team, there is room for improvement. I would also venture to say that many of the Pacers statistics are skewed by the fact they play in the Eastern Conference.

                Its one thing to just look at the numbers and say well the Pacers are a good rebounding team because we are 6th or a good defensive team because were ranked in the top ten.

                But the difference between top 10 and middle of the pack average comes down to about a rebound and a half. Factor in the pacers play in the East where the teams are not as good offensively and shoot a lower %, and the results again skew the numbers.

                Do you really believe the Pacers would be top ten defensively and rebounding if they played in the West. I doubt it. Those numbers would slip to the middle of the pack. Play better offensive teams and the overall defense and rebounding numbers would dip to about average would be my guess.

                Playing 3-4 games vs Philly as opposed to 3-4 games vs GS, SA, Memphis, LAC, Portland, Houston, OKC.. etc does make a difference in statistics.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                  Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                  Albeit the pacers are a good rebounding team, there is room for improvement. I would also venture to say that many of the Pacers statistics are skewed by the fact they play in the Eastern Conference.
                  Pacers average one more rebound vs WC teams than they do EC.
                  http://www.basketball-reference.com/...D/2015/splits/

                  There's no point in trying to communicate back and forth with someone who thinks any stat they don't agree with is a fallacy.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    The Pacers aren't a bad fastbreak team because of who is rebounding the basketball. Those problems aren't fixed merely by changing the rebounder.




                    Vogel has said, multipe times, that the rebounding philsophy is for Roy to box out and for the wings to crash.
                    Can someone/anyone explain this to me. Ive played basketball for decades and have no reservations about my own rebounding experience. In fact, Ive defended guys at times as big as 6'8 300, played a guy who was 6'9 with ease and went to Ball State. Easily gave up about 5 inches and yet more than held my own.

                    So what I dont understand is this... does anyone actually rebound the basketball without first boxing out. Is that not the first basic fundamental of basketball 101 when rebounding. As soon as a shot goes up... first and foremost find someone to box out.

                    Excuse me... but is this not what ever player in the NBA does on 90% of rebound attempts. Rebounding and boxing out may as well be a synonymous because you cannot do one without the other. I simply do not get how Roy is specifically instructed any differently than any other player in the nba when it comes to rebounding.

                    It is beyond me that folks continuously buy into this crazy notion that Roy by boxing out is doing anything uniquely different than 99% of the other players in this lg.


                    With all due respect, its got to be the one of the most far fetched ideas I have ever heard of when a player is asked only to box out and not rebound the basketball because the two are done almost simultaneously. Just makes zero sense to me that Roy is only able to box out and not rebound at the same time.

                    Just a complete load of bull im not buying into.
                    Last edited by PacersPride; 03-30-2015, 03:42 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                      Yes, players actually do just go for rebounds and not worry about boxing out.

                      Jermaine O'neal's entire tenure had PDer's complaining about his lack of boxing out.

                      I'm sorry you think Frank Vogel's words a a load of bull.
                      "This is indicative of the sacrifice of this team," Vogel said. "A lot of times, (the bigs), they're sacrificing themselves to wipe out the best rebounders on the other team while the guards come back and get the numbers.
                      "It's a sacrifice," Vogel continued, "more than anything."
                      http://www.indystar.com/story/sports...ounds/4988905/
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Pacers average one more rebound vs WC teams than they do EC.
                        http://www.basketball-reference.com/...D/2015/splits/

                        There's no point in trying to communicate back and forth with someone who thinks any stat they don't agree with is a fallacy.
                        Are you sure about this. Per the link you reference it states Pacers average 45.2 vs East and 43.6 vs West. That is 1.6 rebounds less per your reference.

                        It is the opponent of Western Conference teams that average almost a full rebound more more than the East.

                        Which only proves my point.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                          Not to mention that the late great John Wooden himself didn't teach his players to box out.

                          Wooden had his coaching quirks. He rejected the "boxing out" of opponents to keep them from getting rebounds, preferring players concentrate on where the ball was.
                          http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...08650952252322

                          The rebounding philsophy of just going after the ball and not boxing out is called "positive rebounding."

                          And I heard Wooden talk about it in person at Butler about 10years ago.

                          EDIT: Wooden talked about how he didn't think it made sense for his players to go away from the ball, find their man, make contact, and then go towards the ball. He said that when you're in good defensive position, you have inside position on the offense already, so go attack the ball and make the offense go through you to try and get the rebound.

                          I always laugh when people try and say the NBA isn't fundamentals based, but they're right when it comes to rebounding. There's really not a whole lot of boxing out, it's the best athletes going to go get the ball.
                          Last edited by Since86; 03-30-2015, 03:29 PM.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                            Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                            Are you sure about this. Per the link you reference it states Pacers average 45.2 vs East and 43.6 vs West. That is 1.6 rebounds less per your reference.

                            It is the opponent of Western Conference teams that average almost a full rebound more more than the East.

                            Which only proves my point.
                            No.

                            Conference Eastern 45 23 22 36.3 82.6 7.4 21.3 17.4 22.8 10.6 45.2 21.4 5.9 4.9 13.2 21.2 97.4 35.6 82.4 7.3 21.0 17.5 23.3 9.8 42.2 20.3 7.0 5.2 12.2 21.8 96.0
                            Western 28 9 19 36.9 84.1 7.1 20.9 15.5 20.4 9.9 43.6 21.4 6.6 3.9 13.6 21.1 96.3 36.4 82.2 7.2 20.9 19.3 24.9 9.4 43.1 19.5 8.3 4.3 12.3 20.6 99.3

                            43.1>42.2
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Yes, players actually do just go for rebounds and not worry about boxing out.

                              Jermaine O'neal's entire tenure had PDer's complaining about his lack of boxing out.

                              I'm sorry you think Frank Vogel's words a a load of bull.

                              http://www.indystar.com/story/sports...ounds/4988905/
                              It has been too long since JO played for me to critique those type of statements based on others from the forum. No offense but I have seen many on here that have no clue what the hell they are talking about. You want an example, here ya go.

                              http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...the-Year-Award


                              No one said Vogels words were bull but I am not taking that to be scriptural like you. There could be a dozen factors that went into Vogels comment.

                              Secondly, there are times when you are facing an elite rebounder, and yes on those occassions you "only" box out. I will use my own personal experience as an example... in that when facing elite rebounders then yes I will only box them out and take myself out of the play at the same time to keep them off the glass.

                              but there is a reason that has to be done, its because that person is an elite rebounder and therefore you box them out relentlessly.

                              However, not every player Roy faces is elite, and by "only" boxing out it is basically an equalizer in terms of rebounding. If Roy is only boxing out then it is a draw per se becasue Roy by only boxing out is taking himself out of the play as well.

                              Therefore no advantage is truly gained. Whereas if you box out and rebound you have the advantage. If Roy is that **** poor of a rebounder that he is only capable of boxing out and not rebounding then again my point has been proven once again.

                              Perhaps, you are correct. Vogel may see that Roy is just not that good of a rebounder, and figures he would take a draw (box out to the point one doesnt rebound equalling draw) vs (box out and rebound resulting in advantage).

                              Vogel must really believe Roy sucks at rebounding to ask him to only make certain he accomplishes half the battle of the boards in boxing out.


                              No way am I buying this line of manure that Roys only job is to box out, cause if it is then Roy really in fact does suck at rebounding.

                              For the love of god, you dont keep boxing out to the point you completely ignore the basketball unless you are facing elite rebounders or you just flat out suck at boxing out to begin with thats all you have the capacity to accomjplish.

                              Again, sorry but i am not falling for that line of crap.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Post Game Thread 3/26 - Pacers @ Bucks

                                When you can quote me of saying that Roy's only job is boxing out, you'll have a point.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X