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

All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
    ^^ Define 'bad game' as compared to their averages at the time.
    Nothing to dispute with your request, simply like to piggyback with the following.


    Originally posted by aamcguy
    New arguments? Hibbert is going to continue to put up ~10-12 ppg, 7-8 rpg while providing excellent defense.


    Can anyone please define "excellent" defense?

    For example: If Roy has rim protection fg% less than 45% vs the Clippers, yet DeAndre Jordan scores 23 and grabs 15 rebs. Where is the line drawn.

    "Excellent Defense" seems open to interpretation by PD standards. More specifically, is only Rim Protection FG% vs relevant, and individual defense therefore deemed inconsequential?

    If Defense is Roys calling card it should be evaluated with integrity. Supporting the notion Roy is elite based upon a single statistic that also infers Myers Leonard protects the rim at high level simply seems bogus.

    http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/pla...gular%20Season



    To illustrate as follows: Four must win games in order to clinch a playoff berth when it mattered most:



    3/21/15: Brooklyn 123 @ IND 111

    Brook Lopez: 31 mpg, 11-14, 4 rebs, 26pts, 4 blks
    Roy Hibbert: 27 mpg, 7-14, 6 rebs, 16 pts, 1 blk


    3/26/15: IND 107 @ MIL 111

    Zaza Pachulia: 32 mpg, 4-7, 6 rebs, 12 pts, 2 steals
    Roy Hibbert: 27 mpg, 3-5, 3 rebs, 10 pts, 2 blks, 1 steal


    3/31/15: IND 106 @ Brooklyn 111

    Brook Lopez: 40 mpg, 11-17, 11 rebs, 24 points, 2 blks
    Roy Hibbert: 20 mpg(?), 3-11, 3 rebs, 7 points, 3 blks


    4/1/15: IND 87 @ Boston 100

    Tyler Zeller - 24mpg, 8-9, 3 rebs, 19 pts, 1 steal
    Roy Hibbert - 19 mpg, 3-9, 3 rebs, 7 pts, 1 block



    For the record:
    Of the above games, which were considered "excellent defense provided" by Roy?


    Summary:

    Roys Opponent Averages - 31.75 mpg, 34/47 (72 FG%), 6 rebs, 20.5 ppg
    Roy Hibbert Averages - 23.5 mpg, 16/39 (41 FG%), 3.75 rebs, 10 ppg



    Originally posted by aamcguy
    Hibbert is going to continue to put up ~10-12 ppg, 7-8 rpg while providing excellent defense.
    Was the above considered "excellent defense" in 4 must win games according to NBA standards?

    Comment


    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

      Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
      ^^ Define 'bad game' as compared to their averages at the time.
      Well that's the hard part isn't it?

      If I had to quantify my version of a bad game, I would probably go for shooting >= 15% under their season averages. And +15% for a better game Or if it's really early in the season, their averages for the first few games compiled with their previous season.

      So if PG is shooting 45% and takes 10 shots, I would consider games where he makes 4 or 5 an average game. It's not perfect, but I think we can agree a 3 out of 10 would be bad while a 6 out of 10 is a good night. It would get less fuzzy around the edges with more shots attempted.

      We could do real analysis to find out exactly but I'm happy with this definition.
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

        Welcome back, buddy! I guess I'll have to go back to logging in before reading anything on PD.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

          Gone two weeks, and I still see PP using a 4 game sample size. Nothing changes.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            Gone two weeks, and I still see PP using a 4 game sample size. Nothing changes.
            Whats this got to do with the question I posed? or did you simply jump to conclusions and post whatever suits your fancy. Again, I am requesting a specific definition of what constitutes "excellent defense."

            Did you not take the time to read my request. It appears so. In that regard you are correct. Nothing changes.


            Since its agreed Roys offensive and rebounding skill set is excused, and his basis for value is dependent upon defense. I am requesting something more concrete in terms of defining "elite" defense than a single statistic that at the same time suggests Myers Leonard as an elite rim protector.

            I can post a 100 game sample size but thats not waht I am digging for. I want to know what constitutes "excellent" defense.

            Is Rim Protection all we got to stand on or is game logs also considered valid. I have no issues with raising the bar to 100 game sample size over the last two seasons. None whatsoever. And I beleive you know that to be fact Since86.

            If no one can define excellent defense how is it we know what it is when we see it?


            So again, the 4 must win games listed above, vs subpar competition overall (Lopez, Zaza, Zeller) was Roys defense excellent by NBA standards. Not sure how I can make my point any more clear than this.

            What determines elite defense? Anyone?
            Last edited by PacersPride; 09-02-2015, 04:33 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

              Here's my question - if Roy's defense forced his opponents to score in different ways and the Pacers as a team did not change the defense to stop them, how is that an indictment of Roy's defense?

              Basically, we have a situation where Roy's defense caused teams to change how they played the Pacers. That seems like a good starting definition for "above par" to me.

              The difference seems to be that since he was not able to single-handedly adapt his style to the changes in very specific instances, you call it an indication of his total and complete inability to defend.

              There is this very huge confusion between Roy's personal defensive ability and whether his defense contributed to the defense of the team as a whole. It is completely possible to have an excellent defender who seems to give the team no advantage because the opponent can score in other ways. That doesn't change the skillset of the player, just his value for that skillset.

              And then, of course, comes the fact that in spite of the struggles against certain players the team as a whole did pretty well - and lost the ECF in 2013-2014 not at all because of Roy Hibbert's defense but because of LBJ.
              BillS

              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...

              Comment


              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                Whats this got to do with the question I posed? or did you simply jump to conclusions and post whatever suits your fancy. Again, I am requesting a specific definition of what constitutes "excellent defense."

                Did you not take the time to read my request. It appears so. In that regard you are correct. Nothing changes.

                Nothing. Which is about as much as your post had to do with what aamc said. He was talking about Roy in general, you talked about Roy in 4 games, I was talking about Roy in general.

                There's no need to read your post, because you've copied and pasted it 150 times in this thread already. I just think it's funny you're still using 4 games as a counter-point about Roy's defense, like those 4 games are the norm and not the exceptions
                Last edited by Since86; 09-02-2015, 04:47 PM.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  PP using a 4 game sample size.
                  Let me make sure I understand this clearly becasue I may have just stumbled upon the fundamental difference in opinion between those in favor of Roy as center for the Pacers and those against.

                  A 4 game sample size from "MUST WIN GAMES" where Roy was outplayed in the following fashion:

                  Roys Opponent Averages - 31.75 mpg, 34/47 (72 FG%), 6 rebs, 20.5 ppg
                  Roy Hibbert Averages - 23.5 mpg, 16/39 (41 FG%), 3.75 rebs, 10 ppg


                  means next to nothing to no one?

                  What about an entire postseason Roy fails to show up to: Is that too small a sample size as well for some?

                  11/12:
                  FG%.500 - Pts 11.7 - Rebs 11.2 - Blks 3.1

                  12/13:
                  FG% .511 - Pts 17.0 - Rebs 9.9 - Blks 1.9

                  13/14:
                  FG% .449 - Pts 9.3 Rebs 5.5 - Blks 1.4


                  Which games over the last two seasons am I too reference in order to illustrate Hibbert is elite defensively? Since I am having next to no luck someone help me out here.

                  Its said over and over again Roy is elite defensively. Someone prove it to me when it mattered most.

                  Outside of NY, Philly, and some other scrub teams, I got nothing. What you got Since86. Since my data doesnt meet your standards. Show me where Roy has been a "consistently" elite defensive presence at anytime the previous two seasons.

                  Preferably box scores vs Elite if you can find it. Show me where Roy shut them down.

                  He is "elite defensively" right. Can you Prove it.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                    I can post a 100 game sample size but thats not waht I am digging for. I want to know what constitutes "excellent" defense.
                    Please do. I bet you don't because you'll find out that Roy is elite.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Here's my question - if Roy's defense forced his opponents to score in different ways and the Pacers as a team did not change the defense to stop them, how is that an indictment of Roy's defense?

                      Basically, we have a situation where Roy's defense caused teams to change how they played the Pacers. That seems like a good starting definition for "above par" to me.
                      I guess the issue is Roy went from defending his opponent pretty well AND protected the rim, to just being able to protect the rim. This coupled with an inability to make teams pay for certain match ups on the offensive end (think Milsap) is what led to such a decline in the minutes he played.

                      The difference seems to be that since he was not able to single-handedly adapt his style to the changes in very specific instances, you call it an indication of his total and complete inability to defend.
                      IMO, it's not a question if Roy can defend the rim. It's a fact he can and is very good at it. The question is, at this point, is Roy more than a specialist big that can only play around 20 mpg?

                      My answer would be that the days of Roy as a starting center are number UNLESS he can score consistently to make small lineups pay and he is at best a lower level Bogut.

                      There is this very huge confusion between Roy's personal defensive ability and whether his defense contributed to the defense of the team as a whole. It is completely possible to have an excellent defender who seems to give the team no advantage because the opponent can score in other ways. That doesn't change the skillset of the player, just his value for that skillset.

                      And then, of course, comes the fact that in spite of the struggles against certain players the team as a whole did pretty well - and lost the ECF in 2013-2014 not at all because of Roy Hibbert's defense but because of LBJ.
                      Well as a team we were better with Roy of the court last year and we managed to be a top defense by playing Roy LESS minutes in a season where we lost PG and had several different lineups throughout the year.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                        He is "elite defensively" right. Can you Prove it.
                        Opponents shot 42.6% against him at the rim last season.

                        Rudy Gobert lead the league in that stat at 40.4%. Ibaka was 40.8%. Unless you think there's <2% difference between elite, and Roy, then yeah....
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          Nothing. Which is about as much as your post had to do with what aamc said.
                          Originally Posted by aamcguy
                          New arguments? Hibbert is going to continue to put up ~10-12 ppg, 7-8 rpg while providing excellent defense.
                          Excellent defense vs whom and when. Ive posted several game logs (Boogie Cousins, DeAndre Jordan, Al Jefferson) none of it is good enuff for you.

                          So I drop it down to Zaza and Zeller, still it means nothing in must win games. When are where did Roy last consistently dominate defensively?

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                            SI ranking Hibbert at #95 in NBA, currently putting him at #20 among players they say our centers and there are still 10 more players to be named.

                            Roy could prove everyone wrong, but it's hard to argue that Roy was elite at anything consistently that converted into wins at that price tag. If he was considered elite by any team around the league, they would have been clamoring to offer more than a second round pick.


                            #95 ROY HIBBERT
                            Lakers | Center | Last year: 52

                            What’s more damning: That the Pacers posted a better defensive rating in 2014–15 without Roy Hibbert (100.7) than with him (101.1), or that they traded the two-time All-Star center to the Lakers this summer for the NBA equivalent of zilch (a future second-round pick)? Neither fact reflects kindly on Hibbert, the former Defensive Player of the Year contender who played an integral role on Indiana’s back-to-back trips to the Eastern Conference finals in 2013 and 2014, but who has also dealt with confidence issues and inconsistency throughout his seven-year career.

                            READ MORE
                            Pacers president Larry Bird ultimately concluded this summer that Hibbert’s signature rim-protection wasn’t enough to overcome his extremely limited offensive game, his no-show nights on the glass, his lack of agility and versatility, and his sometimes perplexing personality. The sexy small-ball revolution only looks like more salt in the wounds for this 7’2’’ behemoth. As he enters a contract year in L.A., Hibbert won’t only be fending off Kobe Bryant’s constant glares and working through his own mental baggage, he’ll also be fighting to prove that traditional big men aren’t quite ready to cede the floor to undersized, multi-positional talents.

                            In a best-case scenario, Hibbert rebuilds his market value by resurrecting a pathetic Lakers defense that has (almost) nowhere to go but up after ranking No. 29 last year. Indeed, if the Lakers make any meaningful progress protecting the paint, he should be the first in line—and perhaps the only one in line—to get the credit, and another rich contract will likely be waiting come July. In a (more likely) worst-case scenario, Hibbert’s own physical limitations and matchup problems, the total lack of credible defensive players around him, and the questionable stewardship of Byron Scott combine to turn Hibbert into a gigantic punching bag during another dreadful campaign. This same organization just chewed up and spit out Dwight Howard, so there’s plenty of reason to doubt that the less-gifted Hibbert will thrive under the scrutiny. – B.G.

                            2014-15: 10.6 PPG, 7.1 RPG, 1.6 BPG, 44.6 FG%
                            Advanced: 15.4 PER, Win Shares: 4.2, -0.01 RPM
                            http://www.si.com/nba/top-100-nba-pl...cetype=default
                            Last edited by freddielewis14; 09-02-2015, 05:10 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Opponents shot 42.6% against him at the rim last season.

                              Rudy Gobert lead the league in that stat at 40.4%. Ibaka was 40.8%. Unless you think there's <2% difference between elite, and Roy, then yeah....
                              Opponents shot 45.5% vs Ian at the rim defensively. Is he elite?

                              By your own admission theres less than a 3% difference between Roy and Terrance Jones (45.9). Is he elite? Jonas Valanciunas 46.5% is he elite? Timothey Mozgov 46.6. Elite?

                              Kostus Koufas 46.9? Elite?


                              If Roy is elite defensively, why did Vogel choose not to assign Roy to Marc Gasol in a must win game to get in the postseason?? Would it not be wise to assign an "elite defender" to an elite offensive player?

                              Im stumped. If Roy is elite defensively, why was he not assigned to Gasol in a must win game.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                Please do. I bet you don't because you'll find out that Roy is elite.
                                That was my intent then got banned for what I still have been given no reason. Requested one and nothing provided. Yes, with ease I will post every head to head vs each center Roy will be facing in the West.

                                How much you want to stake on "finding out" Roy is "elite." I got no doubts Roys defense is severaly overrated on this board due to one single statistic. Just one. One meaningless BS statistic.

                                Take the top ten centers in this lg, head to head over the past 3 seasons (which was my intent prior to banishment) and were gonna see exactly how elite Roy Hibbert is on the defensive side of the ball.

                                We all know he gives next to nothing offensively. Defensively vs the elite and scrubs alike it dont matter - 4 game or 40 game sample size. I will back my claim with whatever you got to put on the table.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X