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

You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 7
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
  • #1

    You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

    I don't know if I should come right out and say this, most of you will either disagree with me or just won't want to hear it especially after a meaningless preseason game. Do I really want to bring the wrath of Pacers Digest down on me. I've really thought about it, and I'm just going to go ahead and say it.

    Our point guards aren't very good, and by that I mean Tinsley and Saras. If that is our one-two punch at point guard this season I will have a huge problem with this Pacers team. Saras is just terrible, I really don't need to say anything else about that, this has been discussed to death. I really don't see any reason he should even play at all. If I were the coach he'd never get off the bench.

    Enough of Saras, let me address Tinsley. First of all when did Deron Williams become Magic, Isiah, Stockton and KJ all rolled into one. He could have scored whenever he wanted (granted our help defense was terrible) but Tinsley had no chance in trying to stop Williams and Deron isn't even a top 10 point guard or top 15 point guard.

    I think all of Tinsley's injuries have clouded our memory of him as a player. Players always get better in fans minds as they sit on the bench. Tinsley wasn't even the 3rd best point guard on the court tonight. He certainly wasn't the Pacers best point guard tonight. It is pretty sad when the Pacers best point guard is a 38 year old journeyman. If Darrell Armstrong was a few years younger I would want him to start, I would want him to play 30-35 minutes per game.

    It was such a breath of fresh air to see Armstrong tonight. His hustle, his defense but most of all his leadership was evident tonight. Tinsley gives you none of those three things. (yes my "clean slate" is no longer clean).

    I expect to get crucified for this posts, and yes I know it is only preaseason, but I got disgusted watching Saras and Tinsley tonight. Is there a worse point guard combo in the NBA. I don't know. I expect Rick to rectify the situation, Saras will not be the second string point guard, you can mark my words on that. I

    The more I see Armstrong, Greene and Daniels play the point this season the happier I'll be.

    OK, let me get to other things tonight

    The other area that is a concern to me is rebounding, more specially defensive rebounding, the Jazz really manhandled us in that area. The Jazz were the number 1 rebounding team in the NBA last season so maybe we should expect that. I don't see the Pacers anything more than an average rebbounding team, but maybe that is good enough.

    Let me make a few other quick observations.

    It was really nice walking into Conseco Fieldhouse tonight, I felt like I was home again. There were more people there than I thought there would be, and the boos for Jackson were tepid at best. When he first came into the game, there was hardly anything, even after two straight turnovers and a bad shot, there was still nothing. The other two times he came into the game, there were some boos for sure, but it wasn't much to speak of. Jax played a really tentative game though.

    Let me get to the Pacers defense, besides the embaraasement that was the defense played by JT and Saras, the Pacers D was OK, the defense is more aggressive on the ball and in passing lanes than they have been the past few seasons (of course with that you give up some inside shots and you give up some penetration) maybe that is why JT and Saras stood out. Pacers will create more turnovers this season and that is good.

    Maybe Tinsley and Saras just can't play the pressure defense the Pacers are trying to get them to play. But defense wasn't the only problem with those two, they weren't very good on the offensive end either.

    I give the Jazz and jerry Sloan a ton of credit. Their halfcourt offensive system is fun to watch, they set picks, they pass the ball, they are in constant motion, and their defense is very physical - Sloan is a great coach.

    I was impressed with Al tonight, he was extremely aggressive and was obviously the Pacers best player on the court tonight, in a lot of ways it seems like he never left the Pacers and yet he is a better player.

    Granger was good in spots, he tends to get lost at times when JO and Al are out there.

    I guess that is about it. Why couldn't Armstrong be 5 years.

    Should I just delete this post and make my life easier?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

    For every game that tinsley has where he *removed* he is spectacular in two. But yeah Runi does *removed*.

    Well its preseason, the other guys are playing for their lives. Tins knows he is in the clear.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

      I agree on Runi and I agree that JT had a bad game. I also agree that this was a meaningless pre season game.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

        I agree with all of your points. Saras is absolutely terrible. I really had it with him when he was baby stepping/backing the ball up against Dee Brown and then got picked any damn way. Horrible ball handler, and not an NBA caliber player AT ALL. Tinsley had an off game, but he did deflect the ball a lot of times and each time it lead to a turnover for our defense.

        I've always loved Sloan's coaching style. During warmups I was telling a guy next to me "If we're not careful, Sloans team will run a basketball clinic on us.", and that's pretty much what they did offensively. I think Sloan is the best coach in the NBA because of his ability to get his team all on one page and make everybody look like the same player. No one person ever really stands out, they just come as a team, play as a team, and leave as a team, no BS in between. Doesn't matter who's playing for him, he can always find a way to make their strengths bring out the best in the team.

        I mentioned it in another thread and I'll say it again... Regardless of how JO's numbers look on paper I don't think it told the whole story about just how ugly the game he had tonight was. I never thought I'd say this, but Al Harrington looks like a way better player out there than JO, BY FAR. Al doesn't force anything and plays within his ability which he has a lot of. JO seemed to have a lot of Erick Dampier moments out there. I actually would like to see JO not worry about being the #1 guy, and just let the game come to him. We have plenty of guys that can lead this team in scoring on any given night. He just needs to do the things we need him do, like some dirty work.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

          UB summed it up pretty good. Tinsley's game goes straight to the crapper when he's getting torched on D. (So whenever an aggressive PG plays us, look out) We need him to play well badly this season. Sarunas struggled again and at this point Armstrong may be the better option as the #2 PG.

          Overall our guard play was bad, but we were missing Daniels and it was Jack's first game. However, our lack of outside shooting is going to be an issue all season though.

          Al and JO got their points, but that is to be expected. Our boys have a long way to go. Keep the faith.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

            Speedy Claxton and Tyronne Lue from Atlanta? Are they worse?
            What about Rafer "Skip to My Lou" Alston and John Lucas III on Houston?
            Toronto, Milwaukee, and Portland aren't sitting pretty either IMO.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

              Yes, yes, and yes. I'm still willing to give Jamaal a chance, but I surely hope 3 names don't come to haunt us in the next few years:

              Rajon Rondo (21st).
              Marcus Williams (22nd).
              Dee Brown (46th).

              All after our picks. I'm sure Kegboy will throw in a couple other names too.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                i haven't been as active on the site in the last month or so... so forgive me if this is a really stupid question: who the hell is Sean Lampley? and why do we have a new player if we already were needing to cut 3?
                This is the darkest timeline.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I don't know if I should come right out and say this, most of you will either disagree with me or just won't want to hear it especially after a meaningless preseason game. Do I really want to bring the wrath of Pacers Digest down on me. I've really thought about it, and I'm just going to go ahead and say it.

                  Our point guards suck, and by that I mean Tinsley and Saras. If that is our one-two punch at point guard this season I will have a huge problem with this Pacers team. Saras is just terrible, I really don't need to say anything else about that, this has been discussed to death. I really don't see any reason he should even play at all. If I were the coach he'd never get off the bench.

                  Enough of Saras, let me address Tinsley. First of all when did Deron Williams become Magic, Isiah, Stockton and KJ all rolled into one. He could have scored whenever he wanted (granted our help defense was terrible) but Tinsley had no chance in trying to stop Williams and Deron isn't even a top 10 point guard or top 15 point guard.

                  I think all of Tinsley's injuries have clouded our memory of him as a player. Players always get better in fans minds as they sit on the bench. Tinsley wasn't even the 3rd best point guard on the court tonight. He certainly wasn't the Pacers best point guard tonight. It is pretty sad when the Pacers best point guard is a 38 year old journeyman. If Darrell Armstrong was a few years younger I would want him to start, I would want him to play 30-35 minutes per game.

                  It was such a breath of fresh air to see Armstrong tonight. His hustle, his defense but most of all his leadership was evident tonight. Tinsley gives you none of those three things. (yes my "clean slate" is no longer clean).

                  I expect to get crucified for this posts, and yes I know it is only preaseason, but I got disgusted watching Saras and Tinsley tonight. Is there a worse point guard combo in the NBA. I don't know. I expect Rick to rectify the situation, Saras will not be the second string point guard, you can mark my words on that. I

                  The more I see Armstrong, Greene and Daniels play the point this season the happier I'll be.

                  OK, let me get to other things tonight

                  The other area that is a concern to me is rebounding, more specially defensive rebounding, the Jazz really manhandled us in that area. The Jazz were the number 1 rebounding team in the NBA last season so maybe we should expect that. I don't see the Pacers anything more than an average rebbounding team, but maybe that is good enough.

                  Let me make a few other quick observations.

                  It was really nice walking into Conseco Fieldhouse tonight, I felt like I was home again. There were more people there than I thought there would be, and the boos for Jackson were tepid at best. When he first came into the game, there was hardly anything, even after two straight turnovers and a bad shot, there was still nothing. The other two times he came into the game, there were some boos for sure, but it wasn't much to speak of. Jax played a really tentative game though.

                  Let me get to the Pacers defense, besides the embaraasement that was the defense played by JT and Saras, the Pacers D was OK, the defense is more aggressive on the ball and in passing lanes than they have been the past few seasons (of course with that you give up some inside shots and you give up some penetration) maybe that is why JT and Saras stood out. Pacers will create more turnovers this season and that is good.

                  Maybe Tinsley and Saras just can't play the pressure defense the Pacers are trying to get them to play. But defense wasn't the only problem with those two, they weren't very good on the offensive end either.

                  I give the Jazz and jerry Sloan a ton of credit. Their halfcourt offensive system is fun to watch, they set picks, they pass the ball, they are in constant motion, and their defense is very physical - Sloan is a great coach.

                  I was impressed with Al tonight, he was extremely aggressive and was obviously the Pacers best player on the court tonight, in a lot of ways it seems like he never left the Pacers and yet he is a better player.

                  Granger was good in spots, he tends to get lost at times when JO and Al are out there.

                  I guess that is about it. Why couldn't Armstrong be 5 years.

                  Should I just delete this post and make my life easier?
                  I just heard the first half on radio and just bits of the second half. Tinsley if he doesn't swipe the ball doesn't play a lot of defense and you are correct that his ability is inversely proportional to the number of games he plays. At the beginning of the game boyle said that Tinsley just got out of William's way as he went to the basket. This is why the pacers can't afford to cut Greene or Hunter just yet. That said I am more concened that the pacers do not have a reliable perimeter 3 point shooter for the first time in a long time. Reggie and Peja could do that but who else is going to stretch the defense?

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                    Harrington looked ok but a few times I thought Al forced his shots , outside of the flow. I was glad to see Harrison take a charge and hustle .

                    I really enjoy watching DA on the court or even on the sidelines encouraging all the guys when they return to the bench or after a good play. I have a feeling he is going to be one of the fan favorties rather quickly.

                    The part about Granger I agree with to some extent. As the season progesses will there be enough shots for the frontcourt? Does Granger's game really not thrive on having as many looks as JO or Al ?

                    What about Daniels playing the 2 on defense, and Granger playing the 2 on offense ?

                    Why Not Us ?

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                      Well, when you traded AJ you pretty much guaranteed the lottery if Tinsley's injury history from the last 3 games holds up IMO. Armstrong's a 15mpg guy at this point of his career.

                      I didn't see tonight's game so I can't comment on Tinsley tonight but he always has been pretty decent at running the offense and while his defense isn't great, it's been good enough the past couple of years where good rotations have made it much less of a liability than it used to be.

                      But to this day I don't understand the AJ trade. If you'd drafted Marcus Williams it would have made sense.
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                        Tinsley played horrible, but I am no more concerned than I was before this game. Saras has proven he cannot play PG but for spot minutes. These are the reasons I want Greene and Armstrong retained.

                        If Tinsley cannot handle defending a particular player, put Greene on him. BTW, Deron Williams is no superstar but he is a big, strong PG who simply overpowered our guards. He has 25 lbs on Tinman (who is not particularly physical anyway) and even more on Armstrong. So, Greene or Quis may have to play a role in these instances.

                        Not a perfect situation...but it is what it is.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                          and it's still a preseason game...

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                            And Tinsley and Sarunas were very good against the Nets so, its a meaningless preseason game. Lets wait for the reg season to cast judgement UB.


                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                              If we keep Orien, I'm satisfied with the PG situation.

                              Saras is just awful, there's no possible way to disagree with that. I really hope DA pushes him to the back, as I know Orien will.

                              The order of PGs (# of minutes) should be: Jamaal, Orien, DA, and Saras.

                              I just really hope Rick gives Orien and DA a good portion of the backup minutes, I'm very confident in their abilities, especially when compared to Saras. Even if Tins goes down with an injury, I wouldn't be worried at all with Orien as starter.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
                              Working...
                              X