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

Jay's AJ Rant (taken from the Kravitz thread)

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

  • Jay's AJ Rant (taken from the Kravitz thread)

    Originally posted by Hicks
    This roster is better than fighting for the 8th seed. That's not reality.
    Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)

    Sorry, I don't buy the "this team is improved on paper and that will automatically show up in the standings argument."

    I'm not arguing that they've slipped from last season. I'm not even arguing that our top competition for slots 5-8 of the playoffs have drastically improved.

    But when you've got six or seven teams fighting for the last four playoff spots, weird things happen. Did anybody think last March that Philly would fall all the way out of the playoffs and Chicago would get in? Some did, some didn't. But that's what happens when you get into a crazy race with multiple tie-breakers.

    Saying "this team may be lottery-bound" is not that much different that saying, "this is about 0.500 team." A game or two under 0.500 and you're in the lottery. A game or two over 0.500 and you might have the #5 seed.

    (And while I know there is a slight advantage in being the #5 seed instead of the #8 seed it isn't that much of a difference.)
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  • #2
    Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
    Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)

    Sorry, I don't buy the "this team is improved on paper and that will automatically show up in the standings argument."

    I'm not arguing that they've slipped from last season. I'm not even arguing that our top competition for slots 5-8 of the playoffs have drastically improved.

    But when you've got six or seven teams fighting for the last four playoff spots, weird things happen. Did anybody think last March that Philly would fall all the way out of the playoffs and Chicago would get in? Some did, some didn't. But that's what happens when you get into a crazy race with multiple tie-breakers.

    Saying "this team may be lottery-bound" is not that much different that saying, "this is about 0.500 team." A game or two under 0.500 and you're in the lottery. A game or two over 0.500 and you might have the #5 seed.

    (And while I know there is a slight advantage in being the #5 seed instead of the #8 seed it isn't that much of a difference.)


    How much does Ragnar pay you to keep bringing this up?

    You can blame AJ all you want, but he was doing everything he could to help the Pacers win. Im tired of hearing about how he lost us that game because he couldnt feed the post. If that's the case, he is just as much at fault as our other scrubs who couldnt get the job done, or better yet were to damn injured [again] to even be in the game

    ________________________________

    As for the topic at hand, I still think its to early to judge this team. I think having all back helps, but maybe not as much as some of you think he will, but our biggest need IMO is still fixing the "1" spot and getting a reliable starter, and if at all possible ridding ourselfs of Jackson

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

      VA,

      Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

      There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

      In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
        VA,

        Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

        There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

        In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.
        Maybe he would've passed the ball more if he wasn't having the shooting performance of his life...

        Of course I don't think you've ever really explained (IOW, you have pounded it in hard enough) in your argument that if AJ is looking for his own points then he very well could be setting the -rest- of the team up with bad shots, rushed shots, out of position, etc (You seem to have focused that issue mainly on forcing JO out of the offense but there are other players too).... Which means even if HE (AJ) shot 70%, that doesn't mean a lack of offensive flow didn't cause other players to shoot less than their normal percentage.

        Sooooo... the emphassis in the counter argument has been AJ's great percentage meant he wasn't taking shots away from anyone that could've done better... But it could mean in looking for his own offense he failed to set up the other guys... and not just JO... and HURT their performance.

        And if that is the case then the point total should be down and/or the other players have a less than stellar shooting percentage themselves. ...Which I haven't looked at so I don't know...

        -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


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
          VA,

          Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

          There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

          In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.
          Who do I want taking more shots? That depends on who is playing better for that game. Basketball is a game of adjustments, and is your backup point is having the game of his life, you find a way to get him the rock.

          I dont remember that series as well as some of you do, as a matter of fact I have tried to best to forget the last couple of seasons, but I seem to remember JO was not exactly having the best series of his career. Even when we had players who were able to feed him the rock, he wasnt exactly putting up "monster numbers".

          I do agree there is a reason we lost, and that reason is that TPTB handed J.T. the keys to this team, much like they did with Artest, and to top that off they got a "under-sized shooting guard who is in a point guards body" to back him up. We could talk about Runi or Freddie, but if you are going to ****** and moan about AJ not running the offense, then there is no point in even bringing up the other guards.

          Your last comment doesnt make sense to me. I realize you want to blame the loss on someone, and you have made it your mission for that person to be AJ, but I could use that statement with 10000 other games. Just think how badly we would have lost to the Lakers in 2000 in Croshere wouldnt have had such a great performance. You are supposed to keep feeding the guy who is hot, its not his fauly if he has absolutely no help.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

            AJ shot something like 70%! Hell yes I want him taking the shots when he's that hot. If he'd cooled down and kept shooting, I'd have an issue with him, but the man was a flamethrower that night and did the exact right thing. He had the hot hand all night. Points were being put on the board for our team!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

              In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

              Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

              Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

              The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

              Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

              We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

              I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

              This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

              Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

                Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

                Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

                The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

                Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

                We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

                I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

                This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

                Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.
                I think the best argument is that NJ definitely did not expect him to be so hot. If he wasn't that hot, their plan would have worked perfectly and we would have been blown out. Instead, AJ kept hot and thus kept us in the game. Kudos on that to AJ on that but that doesn't mean that Jay doesn't have a point here.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section204

                  I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.
                  There's no problem as long as they are in the flow of the game and what the defense is giving us. But you're saying they weren't really in the flow of the game and it would appear you're using stats to back that up.

                  I never bought the argument on its face that AJ shooting 70% for the game and going for 40 was a problem even if it did mean JO was less involved. But by making the picture bigger and showing the rest of the offense in its entirety stagnated makes a more compelling argument (for me anyway).

                  I have to mention... I didn't get to see much of the game because I had a gig that night. So I appreciate the deeper analysis you just presented.

                  I'm sure someone will now say AJ wasn't the reason the offense stagnated and we're lucky he could go for 40 on some deadeye shooting....

                  But now Jay has my ear

                  -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


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                    Well, during the game I was more focused on "where" JO was getting the ball, not even "how often". Until the fourth quarter.

                    And for the record, he usually had to step out to 20-plus feet and face the basket, and that's not JO's strong point.

                    Late in the game, they put up a "shots attempted graphic" and as soon as the game was over I re-wound to watch it again.

                    If you're New Jersey, anytime you can get the other team's PG to take almost twice as many shots as their "go-to" guy in an elimination game (23 vs. 14), you've won. And that's really the entire story, IMO.

                    To get seven more points from AJ (and for the Pacers to win), he would've had to shoot 83% from the floor. That's even hotter than JO's Game #3 when he was 12-15 (80%).

                    Contrast that with the game JO dominated with fewer shots, a higher FG%, and we actually won that game (fairly easily).

                    Does anyone object if I move the AJ-related comments to its own thread?
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                      As I said, I never said AJ was not at fault. But he was hot, and I will never fault a man who is hot for taking shots.

                      Of course, your whole argument bring up the point of having a "1" who is going to be a "pass first, shoot second" guard who is also able to feed the post (and not counting our rookies who I know as much about as the girl who I asked out at the bar last night) we dont have that guy on our squad. Tinsley would be great in that role, if he was actually able to suit up for the games.
                      ----------------------------------------------------------
                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                      Thanks for the suggestion. Read the fine print.



                      EDIT - GRACE ISN'T IGNORING ME!!
                      It is not possible to ingore administrators or moderators

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                        In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

                        Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

                        Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

                        The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

                        Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

                        We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

                        I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

                        This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

                        Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.
                        Good points Jay. For what it's worth I think you proved your argument!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Jay's AJ Rant (taken from the Kravitz thread)

                          Wow, good job making this its own thread. I have no clue how you did it, but I'm impressed

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                            Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)
                            Jay, I agree that our backcourt, although it has a ton of depth, is weak.

                            And, I think you know that I respect the hell out of 99% of your posts, and even usually agree with your opinion.

                            But the statement about Aj in last year's playoffs is probably the lamest thing I've seen you post.

                            Now, we can argue all day about AJ, but it really doesn't matter anymore. He's gone. But, I guess I just wonder what you would have wanted from your PG?

                            AJ averaged 20 points, 5.2 rebounds, 5.0 assists and shot 51.7% from the field, including 40% from behind the arc.

                            I know that stats never tell the whole story, but not many PGs in the league can compare to AJ's overall stats from the playoffs... not in their regular season stats and not in their playoff stats.

                            When it comes to shots and scoring, the problem the Pacers had in the playoffs was NOT AJ shooting the ball too much, it was the remainder of his teammates not hitting enough shots.

                            With AJ's overall effectiveness, if anything it would have been nice to see him be as selfish in games 1-5 as he was in game 6. If so, maybe we would have had a chance to advance.

                            I really don't know how much more AJ could have done to prove himself to you. Heck, when Jordan averaged 30/5/5, everybody jumped on the bandwagon. Same thing when Pippen averaged 20+/5/5, folks jumped on the bandwagon. Everybody loved those players and what they provided for their teams.

                            Why not AJ's 20/5/5?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Jay's AJ Rant (taken from the Kravitz thread)

                              Fine counterpoints.

                              But your examples (maybe they weren't the best choices) of Jordan and Pippen - well they made their teammates better their team won.

                              AJ did neither. We're not talking about a 40-point performance that won the game. We're talking about scoring a bunch of points in defeat while simulataneously limiting our "best" player's number of touches.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X