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

Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

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

  • Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

    I was debating just to let it be tonight, but I felt there were a few things that I could add after tonight.

    -Jermaine Oneal is hurting. To his credit, he's never going to use that as an excuse, but he's hurting. And he's playing against the toughest frontline in basketball. Anytime the spotlight is on him, he's playing Detroit. Play him against 27 other NBA teams, and he looks like a franchise player.

    I don't blame Jermaine, I blame Donnie for drafting role player after role player to play alongside JO, and not picking up one guy that can take some scoring burden from him, so he doesnt have to go 1 on 2 all the time. Jermaine's a good kid, he's just in a very unfair situation.

    Do I think his friendship is affecting him? No, not really. Rasheed Wallace is all buisness on the court with JO. He does his best to beat him as badly as possible. I can't believe JO really would do any less himself if he could.

    Stephen Jackson is a completely different person during the postseason. He's been there before, and he knows what it takes. Listening to his postgame comments, I think he knows exactly how to conduct himself in the playoffs. But, again, he's under pressure to outplay a damn good player in Tayshawn Prince EVERY NIGHT, because if the two of them draw even, like tonight, the Pacers can't win. Also, Jackson belongs in the post, not the three-point line. He's a big, physical guard. Out at the 3-point line, he's incredibly inconsistent. Also, the high arc on his shot leads to VERY long rebounds.

    Jamaal Tinsley had the injury excuse last year. He doesn't this year. I know he came off IR only a few weeks ago, but physically, he looks fine to me. He just doesn't seem like he can handle pressure. He forces a lot of things that aren't there, and he seems to believe that he's a better scorer than he really is. I know Carlisle stuck up for him tonight after the game, but he's the one guy they pacers CANT win without, and he's getting tag-teamed by Billups and Arroyo. He can't be the 3rd best point guard on the floor and lead Indiana to a win.

    Reggie did a good job of tying his shoes before pregame. A fine double-knot. Which is probably better than anything James Jones has done in the last 10 days. He was a rising star against Boston, but he's doing a good ghost impression this series. I was actually pretty worried about him. I suppose maybe I was overrating him a bit.

    Foster isn't taking anybody by surprise anymore. He gets his boards, but he no longer changes the game. And in no universe should he be throwing up running jump hooks.

    Dale is a solid player, for 15 minutes a game. He reminds me of Elden Campbell (before we exiled Elden to the bench). After so long, those old legs kick in. He's a valuable backup center, though, if you decide to trade foster. I think Foster and Dale often get in each other's way.

    Someone also has to remind dale that he can't get off the floor like he used to, and he should be kicking those boards out like foster does.

    Anthony Johnson has been remarkably solid, for what he used to be. If you could put AJ's brain into Tinsley's body, you'd have an all-star.

    So that brings me to......Rick Carlisle. For the 2nd year in a row, he had Larry Brown on the defensive, and Larry adjusted. Rick, for all his personal growth, still hasn't worked on his weakness: he doesn't adjust during the game. He's good at using timeouts, I just never see Indiana do anything DIFFERENT out of them. After game 4, I thought I'd see the Pacers go to the hoop more. I was wrong. Again, too many jumpers, and too much isolation play.

    Rick is a fantastic regular season coach. The best in the NBA. I think he could take the bobcats to the playoffs. The problem is, Rick's style isn't as good in the playoffs, because it utilizes isolation, not motion. Other than Reggie, nobody moves away from the ball. Its the same style he used here, just with different players. When you're playing a team like boston with weak defender, it works. But eventually you run into a team that can defend well, and you stop scoring on all those 1-on-1 moves. At least, thats how it was with us in 2002 and 2003. When we lost, we lost BAD. Sometimes I see the old pistons in Carlisle's pacers, albeit more talented.

    As good a young coach as he is, Carlisle is a .500 playoff coach. All four seasons he's been able to point to injures and bad shooting nights, but at some point, Rick has got to find a way to adjust against good teams. Your players aren't going to get any hotter if you can't find a way to get them better looks at the basket.

    Still, Rick's a smart guy. Eventually, he'll get the point. I just wonder when that'll be.

    Yes, 11/19 absolves him of any and all critisism. Heck, He should have been coach of the year.

    I just wonder whats going to happen when Rick doesnt have any injuries or suspensions to point to, and is actually EXPECTED to lead a dominant playoff team......

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  • #2
    Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

    Im with you on most of the stuff you say..except for a couple things.

    1.Jermaine has a tendency to not play well against his "friends" in the NBA. (I remember watching him play Kwame Brown,and he made Kwame look like an all-star).

    2.Donnie doesnt just draft role players/trade for role players,But I know its been said over and over,and over again but our 2nd best player is not here (RA).


    But 1 thing I wanted to add,You know that if DET doesnt make it to the finals (and win) this year,Everyone is gonna say the RC is just like Toney Dungy,and LB is just like Chuckie.
    LoneGranger33 said
    Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

      Originally posted by Brian
      But 1 thing I wanted to add,You know that if DET doesnt make it to the finals (and win) this year,Everyone is gonna say the RC is just like Toney Dungy,and LB is just like Chuckie.
      I don't follow that at all. Gruden and Larry Brown couldn't possibly be any LESS alike.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

        Originally posted by Kstat
        I was debating just to let it be tonight, but I felt there were a few things that I could add after tonight.

        -Jermaine Oneal is hurting. To his credit, he's never going to use that as an excuse, but he's hurting. And he's playing against the toughest frontline in basketball. Anytime the spotlight is on him, he's playing Detroit. Play him against 27 other NBA teams, and he looks like a franchise player.

        I don't blame Jermaine, I blame Donnie for drafting role player after role player to play alongside JO, and not picking up one guy that can take some scoring burden from him, so he doesnt have to go 1 on 2 all the time. Jermaine's a good kid, he's just in a very unfair situation.

        Do I think his friendship is affecting him? No, not really. Rasheed Wallace is all buisness on the court with JO. He does his best to beat him as badly as possible. I can't believe JO really would do any less himself if he could.

        Stephen Jackson is a completely different person during the postseason. He's been there before, and he knows what it takes. Listening to his postgame comments, I think he knows exactly how to conduct himself in the playoffs. But, again, he's under pressure to outplay a damn good player in Tayshawn Prince EVERY NIGHT, because if the two of them draw even, like tonight, the Pacers can't win. Also, Jackson belongs in the post, not the three-point line. He's a big, physical guard. Out at the 3-point line, he's incredibly inconsistent. Also, the high arc on his shot leads to VERY long rebounds.

        Jamaal Tinsley had the injury excuse last year. He doesn't this year. I know he came off IR only a few weeks ago, but physically, he looks fine to me. He just doesn't seem like he can handle pressure. He forces a lot of things that aren't there, and he seems to believe that he's a better scorer than he really is. I know Carlisle stuck up for him tonight after the game, but he's the one guy they pacers CANT win without, and he's getting tag-teamed by Billups and Arroyo. He can't be the 3rd best point guard on the floor and lead Indiana to a win.

        Reggie did a good job of tying his shoes before pregame. A fine double-knot. Which is probably better than anything James Jones has done in the last 10 days. He was a rising star against Boston, but he's doing a good ghost impression this series. I was actually pretty worried about him. I suppose maybe I was overrating him a bit.

        Foster isn't taking anybody by surprise anymore. He gets his boards, but he no longer changes the game. And in no universe should he be throwing up running jump hooks.

        Dale is a solid player, for 15 minutes a game. He reminds me of Elden Campbell (before we exiled Elden to the bench). After so long, those old legs kick in. He's a valuable backup center, though, if you decide to trade foster. I think Foster and Dale often get in each other's way.

        Someone also has to remind dale that he can't get off the floor like he used to, and he should be kicking those boards out like foster does.

        Anthony Johnson has been remarkably solid, for what he used to be. If you could put AJ's brain into Tinsley's body, you'd have an all-star.

        So that brings me to......Rick Carlisle. For the 2nd year in a row, he had Larry Brown on the defensive, and Larry adjusted. Rick, for all his personal growth, still hasn't worked on his weakness: he doesn't adjust during the game. He's good at using timeouts, I just never see Indiana do anything DIFFERENT out of them. After game 4, I thought I'd see the Pacers go to the hoop more. I was wrong. Again, too many jumpers, and too much isolation play.

        Rick is a fantastic regular season coach. The best in the NBA. I think he could take the bobcats to the playoffs. The problem is, Rick's style isn't as good in the playoffs, because it utilizes isolation, not motion. Other than Reggie, nobody moves away from the ball. Its the same style he used here, just with different players. When you're playing a team like boston with weak defender, it works. But eventually you run into a team that can defend well, and you stop scoring on all those 1-on-1 moves. At least, thats how it was with us in 2002 and 2003. When we lost, we lost BAD. Sometimes I see the old pistons in Carlisle's pacers, albeit more talented.

        As good a young coach as he is, Carlisle is a .500 playoff coach. All four seasons he's been able to point to injures and bad shooting nights, but at some point, Rick has got to find a way to adjust against good teams. Your players aren't going to get any hotter if you can't find a way to get them better looks at the basket.

        Still, Rick's a smart guy. Eventually, he'll get the point. I just wonder when that'll be.

        Yes, 11/19 absolves him of any and all critisism. Heck, He should have been coach of the year.

        I just wonder whats going to happen when Rick doesnt have any injuries or suspensions to point to, and is actually EXPECTED to lead a dominant playoff team......
        I want to disagree with you but I can't.

        Well, except for one thing. I don't feel like J.O. (for whatever reason) plays well vs. his former mentors from Portland. That is both Rasheed Wallace & Brian Grant. He just can't bring it against them.

        Other than that it may soon be time to break out Jay's post about this team being built for the regular season. But now is not that time.


        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

          Originally posted by Kstat
          I don't follow that at all. Gruden and Larry Brown couldn't possibly be any LESS alike.


          I shouldve elaberated more..What I meant is that Dungy coached the bucs then he gets fired,next season the bucs win the super bowl,And now everyone says that it was really Dungy who won the super bowl.


          RC gets fired,next season DET wins NBA championship.


          So what I was saying is that they will compare the 2 situations.

          People will say that it was actually RC who won the championship.
          LoneGranger33 said
          Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

            Originally posted by Brian
            People will say that it was actually RC who won the championship.
            The first guy to say that (with a straight face), please point him in my direction.

            And this is the first time i've heard dungy was responsible for Tampa winning the superbowl.....

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

              Originally posted by Brian
              I shouldve elaberated more..What I meant is that Dungy coached the bucs then he gets fired,next season the bucs win the super bowl,And now everyone says that it was really Dungy who won the super bowl.
              Btown says that all the time....

              :P

              -Bball
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

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

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                Kstat....completely agree with your assessment of Jax and Tinsley. Jax is a different animal in the PO's. Or is it that the rest of the team is so dismal he shines by comparison??? But yeah, props to Jax2,

                Tinsley.......likes butting his head against the wall. Block his shot? Ok, he'll keep trying the same damn thing until he gets yanked....and get a foul or two along with it. Stop his drive? He'll keep trying the same play...again until he gets yanked. Frustrate him and he becomes another knucklehead who can't handle the pressure....IOW Mel-Mel.
                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                  Originally posted by Kstat
                  And this is the first time i've heard dungy was responsible for Tampa winning the superbowl.....
                  I've heard that everywhere, it was Dungys D that won the superbowl for the Bucs, what did Gruden do the year after that?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                    Just for the record, many people have claimed that the Bucs won the Bowl because of Dungy, including myself. I hear about this a lot due to my living in Florida, but I have heard it from out of state sources as well.
                    Check out my autographed 1972-73 Topps basketball project

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                      Great post Kstat, I certainly don't agree with everything you posted, but the points you are making are certainly reasonable.

                      I just don't for one minute buy the theory that J.O does not play well against his friends. That is being disrespectful to the great defense of Sheed. The one highlight they keep showing from last night is the one where J.O drives into the lane, he initially beats Sheed, but Sheed recovers and blocks the shot, great play by Sheed, but the amazing thing about the play is that Ben is right there ready to block the shot also, with his head almost hitting he rim.

                      That play shows you how tough it is to score on the Pistons inside.

                      I said after the ECF last season that the Pistons defense was the best I had ever seen, better than the Bulls, better than the Bod Boy Pistons, better than the Knicks, or Spurs. But in the first 3 games of this series, I did not think the Pistons defense was as good, well last night they were back to their championship form.

                      IN my life whenever I played against a very good friend or a brother, I wanted to win, beat him more than I would a stranger.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                        Originally posted by Kstat
                        I was debating just to let it be tonight, but I felt there were a few things that I could add after tonight.

                        -Jermaine Oneal is hurting. To his credit, he's never going to use that as an excuse, but he's hurting. And he's playing against the toughest frontline in basketball. Anytime the spotlight is on him, he's playing Detroit. Play him against 27 other NBA teams, and he looks like a franchise player.

                        I don't blame Jermaine, I blame Donnie for drafting role player after role player to play alongside JO, and not picking up one guy that can take some scoring burden from him, so he doesnt have to go 1 on 2 all the time. Jermaine's a good kid, he's just in a very unfair situation.

                        Do I think his friendship is affecting him? No, not really. Rasheed Wallace is all buisness on the court with JO. He does his best to beat him as badly as possible. I can't believe JO really would do any less himself if he could.

                        Stephen Jackson is a completely different person during the postseason. He's been there before, and he knows what it takes. Listening to his postgame comments, I think he knows exactly how to conduct himself in the playoffs. But, again, he's under pressure to outplay a damn good player in Tayshawn Prince EVERY NIGHT, because if the two of them draw even, like tonight, the Pacers can't win. Also, Jackson belongs in the post, not the three-point line. He's a big, physical guard. Out at the 3-point line, he's incredibly inconsistent. Also, the high arc on his shot leads to VERY long rebounds.

                        Jamaal Tinsley had the injury excuse last year. He doesn't this year. I know he came off IR only a few weeks ago, but physically, he looks fine to me. He just doesn't seem like he can handle pressure. He forces a lot of things that aren't there, and he seems to believe that he's a better scorer than he really is. I know Carlisle stuck up for him tonight after the game, but he's the one guy they pacers CANT win without, and he's getting tag-teamed by Billups and Arroyo. He can't be the 3rd best point guard on the floor and lead Indiana to a win.

                        Reggie did a good job of tying his shoes before pregame. A fine double-knot. Which is probably better than anything James Jones has done in the last 10 days. He was a rising star against Boston, but he's doing a good ghost impression this series. I was actually pretty worried about him. I suppose maybe I was overrating him a bit.

                        Foster isn't taking anybody by surprise anymore. He gets his boards, but he no longer changes the game. And in no universe should he be throwing up running jump hooks.

                        Dale is a solid player, for 15 minutes a game. He reminds me of Elden Campbell (before we exiled Elden to the bench). After so long, those old legs kick in. He's a valuable backup center, though, if you decide to trade foster. I think Foster and Dale often get in each other's way.

                        Someone also has to remind dale that he can't get off the floor like he used to, and he should be kicking those boards out like foster does.

                        Anthony Johnson has been remarkably solid, for what he used to be. If you could put AJ's brain into Tinsley's body, you'd have an all-star.

                        So that brings me to......Rick Carlisle. For the 2nd year in a row, he had Larry Brown on the defensive, and Larry adjusted. Rick, for all his personal growth, still hasn't worked on his weakness: he doesn't adjust during the game. He's good at using timeouts, I just never see Indiana do anything DIFFERENT out of them. After game 4, I thought I'd see the Pacers go to the hoop more. I was wrong. Again, too many jumpers, and too much isolation play.

                        Rick is a fantastic regular season coach. The best in the NBA. I think he could take the bobcats to the playoffs. The problem is, Rick's style isn't as good in the playoffs, because it utilizes isolation, not motion. Other than Reggie, nobody moves away from the ball. Its the same style he used here, just with different players. When you're playing a team like boston with weak defender, it works. But eventually you run into a team that can defend well, and you stop scoring on all those 1-on-1 moves. At least, thats how it was with us in 2002 and 2003. When we lost, we lost BAD. Sometimes I see the old pistons in Carlisle's pacers, albeit more talented.

                        As good a young coach as he is, Carlisle is a .500 playoff coach. All four seasons he's been able to point to injures and bad shooting nights, but at some point, Rick has got to find a way to adjust against good teams. Your players aren't going to get any hotter if you can't find a way to get them better looks at the basket.

                        Still, Rick's a smart guy. Eventually, he'll get the point. I just wonder when that'll be.

                        Yes, 11/19 absolves him of any and all critisism. Heck, He should have been coach of the year.

                        I just wonder whats going to happen when Rick doesnt have any injuries or suspensions to point to, and is actually EXPECTED to lead a dominant playoff team......
                        A couple of things: 1.) It took Larry Brown 25 years and far more than 4 playoff appearances before he won a championship, and 2.) for you you to go through a canned analysis of this series and waiting until your second-to-last paragraph to mention 11/19 (off-handedly, I might add) is laughable. Only a Pistons fan could do that with a straight face. Your post is the analytical equivalent of a coroner saying a patient died of heart failure while ignoring the gun wound to their head.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                          I am starting to understand why Dumars fired RC - it really seemed strange then (except you were talking about LB) - but it is pretty clear why he did so now.
                          Heywoode says... work hard man.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                            Originally posted by Kstat
                            I don't blame Jermaine, I blame Donnie for drafting role player after role player to play alongside JO, and not picking up one guy that can take some scoring burden from him, so he doesnt have to go 1 on 2 all the time. Jermaine's a good kid, he's just in a very unfair situation.
                            Frankly, I'm not sure who Donnie could have gotten to pick up some of the scoring. Certianly, nobody in the last several drafts. Its not like he had the number 2 pick with Carmello and Wade on the board (nudge, nudge). Artest is the guy that would pick up he scoring, and trading for Jackson helps there too.

                            Jermaine is what he is, I don't blame him either. Some would argue he is not being used correctly. But when you are consistently picking in the 20's, role players are all you can add.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Well, I guess I may as well add my usual two bits.....

                              Originally posted by Deadshot
                              Just for the record, many people have claimed that the Bucs won the Bowl because of Dungy, including myself. I hear about this a lot due to my living in Florida, but I have heard it from out of state sources as well.
                              And Tony Dungy is also talked about as a guy who can get you to the Playoffs but can't get you a championship (its not like there is a concensus opinion on the guy). Dungy had his chance with Tampa, it was time to bring in a closer. Lets also not forget that "Chuckie's" Raiders were the other team in that Superbowl. Its not like the guy inherited a winner after being the captain of a sinking ship. Sure, the Bucks have gone to pot since which only shows that it was indeed "Dungy's team". That doesn't mean Dungy would have gotten them the ring.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X