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

Okay, how bout Saras 38?

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

  • #91
    Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

    Hicks, you know I'm usually more than willing to believe Kstat started a fight.

    In this case, though, he's definitely not the initiator. European fans without an NBA clue get to trash Carlisle for not starting God's gift to basketball? And that's not even getting into the nationalistic (or "continentalistic") crap.

    Hey, I'll admit I wanted Saras starting over AJ. But not because he's earned it... it's because I think he has the potential to be a better player eventually.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

      Originally posted by Kstat
      I was going to lay off, Hicks. But you know I can't stay away from an argument like "saras succeeds even though he is white" ....
      You kind a exagerating playing with one silly argument i made in the middle of last night. So lets forget about colors.

      Athletic ability is what we are talking about. Now Bird wasnt quick at least his legs. He also had bad dribbling. Reggie was quick I remember he ran like a devil without the ball and he had a very high jump-shot so he could created for himself. Saras doesn't have that.

      So please don't corrupt my argument. Saras is not succeeding even though he white but even not being athlete.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

        Originally posted by Lithfan
        You kind a exagerating playing with one silly argument i made in the middle of last night. So lets forget about colors.

        Athletic ability is what we are talking about. Now Bird wasnt quick at least his legs. He also had bad dribbling. Reggie was quick I remember he ran like a devil without the ball and he had a very high jump-shot so he could created for himself. Saras doesn't have that.

        So please don't corrupt my argument. Saras is not succeeding even though he white but even not being athlete.

        I've tried my best to avoid any of the Saras international debates because the last time I did I failed miserably.

        But in this case I think you are falling for a myth or an old trap that a lot of... well shall we say less than enlightened Hoosiers used to fall for.

        That is the myth that Larry Bird was a poor athlete.

        First off to say that Larry Bird was slow is just wrong. Compared to Michael Cooper or Domonique Wilkins Bird was slow but each of them were 6'6" & 6'7" tall.

        Larry was 6'9" tall and compared to some of the other players of the day at that height he was a freaking gazelle.

        Clifford Ray, Dan Issel & Lonnie Shelton just to name a few.

        It's kind of like the Brad Miller theory in a way. I would always laugh when someone would complain that Brad was a slow player but then laugh that they would compare him to players like Jeff Foster, Jon Bender, etc.

        But comparing apples to apples Brad could run circles around other big slow lumbering centers like Shaq, Even Eschmeier, Greg Ostertagg, etc.

        Then did I read this right, did you just say Larry Bird was a bad dribbler???? Ok, maybe compared to Pete Maravich but again comparing Larry to other 6'9" players of the day Larry was virtually a maestro with the ball. Hell, I'm not sure Larry wasn't just a Wizard with the ball no matter what height he was.

        I hated Bird the player, but I never once questioned his abililty to dribble. Are you sure we're talking about the same player?

        As to Reggie being quick.... Well.... I don't know how to respond.

        Reggie was perpetual motion. Reggie had better cardiovasular conditioning than anyone else on the floor but Reggie was never, even as a young player, considered quick.

        I am making no comments about Saras one way or the other in this post. I just want to say that it would be wrong to fall into the trap of saying that Bird was unathletic.


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

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

          Originally posted by Peck
          I've tried my best to avoid any of the Saras international debates because the last time I did I failed miserably.

          But in this case I think you are falling for a myth or an old trap that a lot of... well shall we say less than enlightened Hoosiers used to fall for.

          That is the myth that Larry Bird was a poor athlete.

          First off to say that Larry Bird was slow is just wrong. Compared to Michael Cooper or Domonique Wilkins Bird was slow but each of them were 6'6" & 6'7" tall.

          Larry was 6'9" tall and compared to some of the other players of the day at that height he was a freaking gazelle.

          Clifford Ray, Dan Issel & Lonnie Shelton just to name a few.

          It's kind of like the Brad Miller theory in a way. I would always laugh when someone would complain that Brad was a slow player but then laugh that they would compare him to players like Jeff Foster, Jon Bender, etc.

          But comparing apples to apples Brad could run circles around other big slow lumbering centers like Shaq, Even Eschmeier, Greg Ostertagg, etc.

          Then did I read this right, did you just say Larry Bird was a bad dribbler???? Ok, maybe compared to Pete Maravich but again comparing Larry to other 6'9" players of the day Larry was virtually a maestro with the ball. Hell, I'm not sure Larry wasn't just a Wizard with the ball no matter what height he was.

          I hated Bird the player, but I never once questioned his abililty to dribble. Are you sure we're talking about the same player?

          As to Reggie being quick.... Well.... I don't know how to respond.

          Reggie was perpetual motion. Reggie had better cardiovasular conditioning than anyone else on the floor but Reggie was never, even as a young player, considered quick.

          I am making no comments about Saras one way or the other in this post. I just want to say that it would be wrong to fall into the trap of saying that Bird was unathletic.
          May be you are right, you should know better.
          He looked clumsy I don't know. All games I saw with Bird, he looked very different from other players. Slow, clumsy unusuall movement I don't know. But then again, he was 6'9''.
          This is what he said about himself in few interviews I've seen. He said that he succeded in spite of physical deficiencies.
          Reggie would have beat Saras one on one?

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

            Other than Magic Johnson I don't know of any other 6'9" players that could handle the ball like Larry Bird.

            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


            • #96
              Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

              Originally posted by Lithfan
              May be you are right, you should know better.
              He looked clumsy I don't know. All games I saw with Bird, he looked very different from other players. Slow, clumsy unusuall movement I don't know. But then again, he was 6'9''.
              This is what he said about himself in few interviews I've seen. He said that he succeded in spite of physical deficiencies.
              Reggie would have beat Saras one on one?
              Larry Bird enjoyed the fact that people thought he was unathletic. It helped his mystique grow by leaps & bounds.

              But Larry was one of the very first players of his size to transition to small forward.

              Remember back in his day 6'9" guys were usually either power forwards or centers, very few ever were athletic enough to play the 3.

              If you go back & look at films of Larry don't compare him to other superstars at the wing positions of the day. Compare him to the 4's & 5's that were there at the time & you will realize that he was very athletic.

              Again though when compared to Wilkins, Jordan or Dr. J, Larry will appear to be very unathletic & compared to them he was.

              I'll give you another player to compare him to, Magic Johnson.

              They were about 1" in height differance but I don't think Magic was any more athletic than Larry.

              They were about the same speed, Magic could dribble better but here is the one that no one ever considers. IMO Bird could jump higher than Magic. I've seen Larry swoop in from the wings & give up a tomahawk slam when he was very young in the league. Magic on his best years could dunk, but barely.

              Jason Kidd uses a similar strategy as Bird btw. He wants people to consider him slow because then they don't expect him to blow by them.

              As to Saras & Reggie one on one?

              I have no idea. Neither was a great defender although both maximized their potential by playing smart defense.

              I would think that they would have to hit every shot they threw up because neither of them would be able to rebound any miss.

              I saw plenty of Reggie as a young man so I know what he could do, but I have only seen Saras this season so to say what he could do in his prime I can't.

              I will say this.

              Reggie at 29 vs. Saras at 29 I would think Reggie would win. But I have not had the privilege of seeing what Saras can do when he is in an open enviroment.


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

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                Originally posted by Peck
                Reggie at 29 vs. Saras at 29 I would think Reggie would win. But I have not had the privilege of seeing what Saras can do when he is in an open enviroment.
                I have no doubt Reggie would win.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  I have no doubt Reggie would win.
                  I was trying to be polite.


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

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                    One of the things that seemed like a bad break ended up helping Larry's game quite a bit. He broke his arm in high school and had to practice everything with his left hand. During that time he learned how to shoot, dribble, etc. very well. Larry could dribble the ball very well.

                    I still disagree that Larry was a great athlete. I don't think he was very fast and I don't think he could jump that high, but clearly he could dunk the ball. His greatest assetts were his shot, size, court vision, and basketball smarts. You can add in to the fact that he was shall we say... confident. So even though he was not going to set any track records, the man was blessed with some physical talents to play this game.

                    Larry was once quoted as saying "I've got making up for a lack of speed down to a science," and I think he was right. So much of basketball is positioning. He knew where to be at the right time and that is half the battle on offense and defense.
                    “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                    motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                    Reggie Miller

                    Comment


                    • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                      Originally posted by brichard
                      Larry was once quoted as saying "I've got making up for a lack of speed down to a science," and I think he was right. So much of basketball is positioning. He knew where to be at the right time and that is half the battle on offense and defense.
                      Fair enough. But he knew that stuff coming into the league... Saras is struggling with it at 29.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                        Originally posted by brichard
                        One of the things that seemed like a bad break ended up helping Larry's game quite a bit. He broke his arm in high school and had to practice everything with his left hand. During that time he learned how to shoot, dribble, etc. very well. Larry could dribble the ball very well.

                        I still disagree that Larry was a great athlete. I don't think he was very fast and I don't think he could jump that high, but clearly he could dunk the ball. His greatest assetts were his shot, size, court vision, and basketball smarts. You can add in to the fact that he was shall we say... confident. So even though he was not going to set any track records, the man was blessed with some physical talents to play this game.

                        Larry was once quoted as saying "I've got making up for a lack of speed down to a science," and I think he was right. So much of basketball is positioning. He knew where to be at the right time and that is half the battle on offense and defense.

                        But who are you comparing him to? Dr. J? Michael Jordan? Clyde Drexler?

                        Let's compare him athleticly to our own Waymond Tisdale.

                        Do you still think Larry was slower & not able to jump has high? Sorry, but it's just a myth that has grown as time has gone on.

                        When you are comparing him to other players of his time frame you have to compare him to other players who were 6'9" tall & I can tell you that Larry could hold his own in a foot race with most of them & he would certainly beat out a few of them.

                        I bet if we lined up Larry (prior to back injury's) against Waymond Tisdale in a foot race Larry would win.

                        Larry would have been able to jump as high as Mike Bantom although he probably wasn't a quick as Mike.

                        What about Len Elmore he was only 6'9" tall, do you think he was an athletic wonder? I saw Lenny play many of times & I can tell you that although he was a good decent center, he wasn't in Larry's realm as far as speed.

                        BTW, this should help put this into perspective as well. Lenny was 6'9" tall & weighed 10 pounds less than Larry yet he played Center.

                        Bird switched between the 3 & 4 depending on who was in with him, although it could be argued he was still the 3 even when Cornbread Maxwell as in the game.


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

                        Comment


                        • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                          Including his two tonight, Sarunas Jasikevicius has made 55 3-pt FG this season, just six off the Pacers' rookie single-season record held by Reggie Miller.
                          SOURCE

                          Js
                          Wait a minute, whoa! Whoa! You don’t actually believe this crap! Do you? Dummy! Brain washed alien souls? E-meter and thetan levels? Those people out there buy that crap. But I thought you were smart enough to see what’s really going on!
                          What's better than telling people a stupid story and having them believe you? Having them pay you for it, stupid!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                            Originally posted by Peck
                            But who are you comparing him to? Dr. J? Michael Jordan? Clyde Drexler?

                            Let's compare him athleticly to our own Waymond Tisdale.

                            Do you still think Larry was slower & not able to jump has high? Sorry, but it's just a myth that has grown as time has gone on.

                            When you are comparing him to other players of his time frame you have to compare him to other players who were 6'9" tall & I can tell you that Larry could hold his own in a foot race with most of them & he would certainly beat out a few of them.

                            I bet if we lined up Larry (prior to back injury's) against Waymond Tisdale in a foot race Larry would win.

                            Larry would have been able to jump as high as Mike Bantom although he probably wasn't a quick as Mike.

                            What about Len Elmore he was only 6'9" tall, do you think he was an athletic wonder? I saw Lenny play many of times & I can tell you that although he was a good decent center, he wasn't in Larry's realm as far as speed.

                            BTW, this should help put this into perspective as well. Lenny was 6'9" tall & weighed 10 pounds less than Larry yet he played Center.

                            Bird switched between the 3 & 4 depending on who was in with him, although it could be argued he was still the 3 even when Cornbread Maxwell as in the game.
                            I think we can agree on a couple of points.

                            1. There were players who were as bad if not worse than Bird playing during his tenure. For example, Magic Johnson is not a good athlete.

                            2. It is probably less of an issue to be a great athlete when you have his size and play his position.

                            However, you are using some pretty extreme examples. Let us look at the Dream Team, these were folks who were his peers right?

                            Jordan, Malone, Drexler, Pippen, and David Robinson are guys I would consider to be great atheltes. They are all very strong, fast, and generally set themselves apart with some physical presence. Or how about James Worthy? Are we comparing Larry Bird's first step to his? Maybe Larry isn't as bad athletically as he purports to be, but he isn't that good either.

                            The interesting thing I notice is that many of the players on the Dream Team are not people I would consider to be great athletes. But I think what hurts Saras, as much as anything else, is the position he is playing... guard. Guards are usually your fastest players on the floor, so a person usually has to be pretty quick. Saras is also pretty short for the NBA, so unlike Larry he can't make up for his lack of speed with some other physical attribute.
                            “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                            motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                            Reggie Miller

                            Comment


                            • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                              I once talked with a guy who played with Bird in college. He said he was as fast as anybody on the court with his first move. Slower after that, sure, but its the first move that matters most.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment


                              • Re: Okay, how bout Saras 38?

                                Originally posted by brichard
                                I think we can agree on a couple of points.

                                1. There were players who were as bad if not worse than Bird playing during his tenure. For example, Magic Johnson is not a good athlete.

                                2. It is probably less of an issue to be a great athlete when you have his size and play his position.

                                However, you are using some pretty extreme examples. Let us look at the Dream Team, these were folks who were his peers right?

                                Jordan, Malone, Drexler, Pippen, and David Robinson are guys I would consider to be great atheltes. They are all very strong, fast, and generally set themselves apart with some physical presence. Or how about James Worthy? Are we comparing Larry Bird's first step to his? Maybe Larry isn't as bad athletically as he purports to be, but he isn't that good either.

                                The interesting thing I notice is that many of the players on the Dream Team are not people I would consider to be great athletes. But I think what hurts Saras, as much as anything else, is the position he is playing... guard. Guards are usually your fastest players on the floor, so a person usually has to be pretty quick. Saras is also pretty short for the NBA, so unlike Larry he can't make up for his lack of speed with some other physical attribute.

                                I'm using extreme examples????

                                You just listed down two of the greatest guards ever & one fantastic small forward.

                                Each of them being 6'6" or 6'7".

                                All that I ask is that he be compared to other players of his size. Now if you wanna say he wasn't as fast as Karl Malone I won't argue at all. I won't even argue about David Robinson, but Robinson was an extrememe case (along with Hakeem) in the fact that they were both quick for big men.

                                I'm not saying Larry Bird was as fast as lightning. I'm just saying that compared to other 6'9" players of his day he was as fast as 75% of them & was probably faster than 50% of them.

                                Yes James Worthy was faster as well.

                                I guess where we are disagreeing on is this.

                                You are saying he was not as athletic as the other elite players of his day, to which I will agree for the most part.

                                But I am saying comparing him to other players of his time frame of the same size he is as fast if not faster.


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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X