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

Quick early-season observations

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

  • #16
    Re: Quick early-season observations

    Originally posted by ajbry View Post
    Nice post overall.

    However, I should expect this, but your Jack section was underestimating him quite a bit. Sure, it's progress that you are able to somewhat say you are satisfied with his performance, but a couple of your statements I have to disagree with.

    "I've hardly noticed when he's on the court." - He's been putting up assists at a nice clip and is a facilitator of our offense, how could you not notice?

    "He's the fourth option at best behind JO, Al, and Tinsley." - I won't even begin to dissect that statement, as we all know he's #3 anyway, and when he's "at his best" he's usually the #1.

    But, it's nice to see you're slowly warming up to him, I guess that's progress.
    He's not been playing as the #3, option, and he shouldn't be. If Granger is "hot", SJax should be content as the fifth option among the starters.

    That's my point... he's playing within his role and a team context, and for the most part he's playing within his limitations. And he is much better for the team when he realizes that JO in the paint is always a better option than he is, Al anywhere on the court is a better option than he is, when Tinsley gets to the rim that's generally a good thing for the Pacers and that makes Tinsley a higher option than he is, and when Danny is in a groove, he's a better option.

    The fact that SJax's assists are going up is just a sign that he realizes his place in the pecking order. Over the past couple of years, that's when his shot selection and turnovers would be the most detrimental, because the team would not be using its best options offensively.

    I've always known he was a fourth- or fifth- option unless your team really stinks (like Atlanta, where he showed he "could" be the #1 option of a very, very bad team.) That's how Pop used him - he was the "wild card" and if he was on, Pop would let him have a bit of freedom. And if not, he'd bring in Manu. After a year in Atlanta, he needed a coach strong enough to reign him back in, and it seems to have taken Rick a long time to figure that out.

    The fact that he now recognizes this with his play is exactly what is helping him, IMO. I think he's playing as well as he's played with the Pacers - he's down to only 11 FGA per game and that's a huge, huge improvement. Of course, he's shooting 31% overall and 22% from three (so the 4.5 3FGA/ game is still outrageously high but he seems to be improving on that since the NOK game - he's only taken 10 total 3FGAs over the past three games so that's progress) so maybe 11 FGA is still waaayy too many for him. I'd certainly like him down to single digits. But the assists are up, as you noted, and he's only at 3 TO/ game and that's not too terribly bad by his standards (and his 1.5 ATO makes it easier to tolerate the 3 TO/game.)

    It is nice that he's acting more like a facilitator of the offense, instead of a detriment. The more he can "blend into the background", the better the team will be.

    With SJax, "less is more." When he tries to do too much, he's not very good and his team suffers because of it. And we've seen glimpses of that already , but for the most part he seems to be trying to do less, and the fewer turnovers and missed shots (and bad shots) allow more opportunities for his teammates that are higher options in the first place.
    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


    • #17
      Re: Quick early-season observations

      Originally posted by Robobtowncolt View Post
      Go Celtics!
      Wtf dude; btw, Tinsley should not be a scoring option, only a situational scorer. And we do have to dump Harrison.
      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Quick early-season observations

        Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
        Okay, in spite of being on the road a lot, I've seen most of the games (but, ironically, I was not in Chicago for the game Saturday night.)

        Quick observations that I'm sure have been covered around here somewhere else...

        (1) Tinsley and JO are just crucial to the success of the "new" Pacers. Its going to take time before every one "looks good" in this system. Even if the system seems to leverage JO's and Jamaal's strengths, they still have years of slow-it-down, isolation-ball habits to break. And it shows at times. The Washington game was a prime example - we all know Tinsley still has defensive limitations but without JO's interior presence, our defense was just miserable.

        (2) I've been proud that Rick seems to be resisting temptation to tighten it up. Quinn had some fascinating things to say on that topic during the Orlando game - to take it one step further, it will take a while before the players are instinctively ready to just play the game (without looking to the bench for a play call). Its a shame it came to this. After all, basketball is a beautiful game to watch when the players are all in movement and in-sync with each other.

        (3) SJax - brace yourselves - I've hardly noticed when he's on the court. And that's a great thing. Because his game is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. But - to his credit - he seems to be doing a much, much better job of playing his role, understanding his role, not disrupting the offense, not hogging the ball, not taking too many terrible shots (empahsize "too many"). When he remembers that, of our starting five, he's the fourth option at best behind JO, Al, and Tinsley, he *can* compliment their games. There have even been times this season where I've thought that he's made "smart" plays - something he's very rarely been accused of in the past. I hope he keeps it up and accumlates some trade value - it would be nice to have options instead of guys that are untradeable.

        (4) David Harrison - lost too much weight. Remember in the Bo Hill era, when the "smart" decision was to have Rik gain weight to play in the post. Well, Rik, as many of us knew, was just a 7'4" small forward, and that didn't work. Larry Brown took one look at Rik in '94 and told him to lose the extra weight, and Rik became a better player.

        We've got the opposite problem with David. David is a bruiser, first and foremost. But not anymore. Now we've got that awful combination of a guy who uses his hands too much... but now he really NEEDS to use his hands because he's getting pushed around as he's never been pushed around before.

        We're doing him a disservice. Its time to let him bulk back up and go play elsewhere. But I sure don't want to see him on the court until he's back to 280lbs, and you all know that I'm a David Harrison fan...

        (5) Powell/ Marshall - Who would've thought that "Throw-in #1" and "Throw-in #2" would've even made the team, let alone play relatively well in their limited roles? Marshall appears headed toward the common young-player problem of playing much better in home games than away games. I'd like the Pacers to try a two week expiriment of giving Foster's minutes to Powell - can Foster's rebounding productivity be replaced in a way that Foster could be used in a trade to improve the backcourt? As for Foster, he seems much more capable of catching the ball this season.

        (6) Daniels - I'm starting to really, really like this kid's game. He's heady, he doesn't seem to make mistakes, I like his effort. And he seems very, very adept around the rim. He doesn't really play the same style I don't think, but he's got many of the same attributes as Vern Fleming, who I always enjoyed watching play because he just had a way of making plays out of nothing.

        Lastly, and most importantly,

        (7) I really underestimated just how good Rick could do at keeping this team competitive most nights while they went through a long learning/ adjustment period. By continuing to emphasize defense overall, even with certain strategic changes defensively, this team is putting themselves in position to win the games it can/ should win (Bobcats, Philly, Orlando, NYK) - something I was concerned about because the last time this team had a real fundamental identity shift like this (toward defense, under Larry Brown) they really looked awful for a number of weeks against every type of opponent.
        QFT

        (eeeeeeeewww...a FIRST for me!)
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Quick early-season observations

          I don't quite understand your #4 or #5 option argument. Yes, he can certainly be a #1 on a bad team. But on this team, he's always been #1 and #2, and now is #3. Saying that he's actually below Granger or even Tinsley is just a reach. He averaged 22 PPG during the stretch of JO's injury in 2005, and was our leading playoff scorer that postseason. Last year he scored 20+ points in 31 games.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Quick early-season observations

            Sure, injuries and suspensions have forced him into a role that he's not capable of playing for a winning team.

            Its obvious to me that its a significant part of the gameplan to get Tinsley to the rim for layups as that dribble-penetration causes defensive rotations that create even better opportunities for JO, Al, Danny, and even SJax. With as much dribble penetration that Tinsley is doing (and generally doing quite well although like everyone I wish he was finishing with a higher percentage) either for his own layup or opportunities for others, I don't see how one could argue that SJax, who has very few plays run for him, is a higher option.

            We're not really running plays for either wing player - SJax and Danny are basically in a position to take advantage of the opportunities created by JO, Al, and Tinsley in a better-moving, better-spaced inside-out offense. SJax and Danny are starting because they're our two best perimeter defenders, not because of their offensive abilities.

            Its up to SJax to decide if he's willing to thrive in this environment - remember Ron used to get numerous "residual" opportunities but spent a lot of time demanding more "touches", to the detriment of the team. And my point is that through seven games SJax has not given us very many of the ballhogging stinkers that he's known for. Just one that I've seen. That's progress.
            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


            • #21
              Re: Quick early-season observations

              The quick whistle and Club Rio seems to have taken the emotion out of his game. I know for me the best thing is that he keeps his mouth shut and plays. I am pleased with this version of Jack, compared to the previous model.

              ....it's amazing that he is our starting SG AND his shooting has been horrific, yet he is getting praise from even his detractors.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Quick early-season observations

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                The quick whistle and Club Rio seems to have taken the emotion out of his game. I know for me the best thing is that he keeps his mouth shut and plays. I am pleased with this version of Jack, compared to the previous model.

                ....it's amazing that he is our starting SG AND his shooting has been horrific, yet he is getting praise from even his detractors.
                He's a smart man. He set the bar low and now can easily rise above it. It was all an elaborate plan to silence critics and win over fans.

                :

                -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


                • #23
                  Re: Quick early-season observations

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                  Now that's just silly.

                  He has a feel for the game of basketball. Specifically, he has an excellent feel for how to play in the low post. He hasn't had good coaching, especially at the NBA level but apparently also at the college level. He's got a couple of fundamental problems that he needs to resolve - especially in terms of technique, improving his footwork a little bit, and to quit relying on his hands (the #2 sign of improper post coaching, trailing only "fronting the post" - or as its better called, "Post Defense for wussies." ) But your comments are so over-the-top I thought I was reading something I'd write...


                  Actually Jay I am now of the thinking that U.B. is not being silly.

                  If it wasn't for Tom White so deftly bringing up Bender I would say that U.B. was about 100% right.

                  I've never seen a player actually regress the more he is in the league. Bender never had it & did not have the mentallity to have it either but David showed signs as a rookie of being something special or at least workable.

                  But it's gotten to the point now where I can honestly say that when he got a DNP-CD against the Bulls I just thought, meh.

                  It's sad really because I honestly had very very high hopes for him. The only thing that U.B. is 100% wrong about is the fact that the guy does not have a basketball body, in fact he is about everything you would ever want from a strong low post player physically.

                  But beyond that it's just not there.

                  I want it to still be there & there is still the part of me that says "if only he had a big mans coach", but then there is the part of me that also says "who was Dale's big man coach or who was Oakley's big man coach"?

                  Some players just have it & sadly some just don't.

                  I'm not sure bringing in Bill Russell, Bill Walton, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar & the ghost of Wilt Chamberlain would make that much differance to David.

                  The guy just can not get past his mental issues with the refs. & frankly he has made enemy's because of his constant complaining.

                  Like I said I wish it wasn't true & you know I have been a big Harrison supporter but as of now I would rather see every single min. he would play be given to Josh Powell.


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

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Quick early-season observations

                    I'm only making this comparision because last year it was made. (Really Bynum should be/is a lot better than David.) If you want to see a young big man develop look at Bynum. He foul troubled nights too but his demeanor great, listens and has shown improvment.
                    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Quick early-season observations

                      Originally posted by Arcadian
                      I'm only making this comparision because last year it was made. (Really Bynum should be/is a lot better than David.) If you want to see a young big man develop look at Bynum. He foul troubled nights too but his demeanor great, listens and has shown improvment.
                      Bynum was also a guy who was good enough to jump straight from high school and be drafted 10th. Harrison played in college and was the last pick of the first round.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Quick early-season observations

                        I agree that is why I typed the first sentence. I think there is a signifigant talent gap.

                        However, on here people believe David has the talent to be an all-star and the two players have been compared. Whether if that is true or not there is also a huge gap better the two's maturity. Thank goodness we are done with high school players.
                        "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                        "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Quick early-season observations

                          Originally posted by Isaac
                          Bynum was also a guy who was good enough to jump straight from high school and be drafted 10th. Harrison played in college and was the last pick of the first round.
                          That is exactly correct - but last year at this time many Pacers fans were glamoring for DH to start and if only Rick would wise up and play him more he'd be the starting center we need. (I think at the forum party last January it was about 90% of the people wanted DH to start) I strongly argued against that last year, but was no one listened. Now a year later, a few of my forum friends are starting to see the light.

                          Of course I hope DH has a great game tonight and leads the pacers to a huge road win

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Quick early-season observations

                            Originally posted by Isaac
                            Bynum was also a guy who was good enough to jump straight from high school and be drafted 10th. Harrison played in college and was the last pick of the first round.
                            Bynum was in no way, shape, or form "good enough" to be drafted straight from HS. Do you think Bender was "good enough" to be drafted straight from HS as well?

                            No HSler is. They're drafted on potential, and potential alone. Except for Moses Malone, there really hasn't been a kid that's made the jump that came in ready to play at that level. Yes, Kobe put up pretty good numbers considering, and so did KG, but they weren't ready ready.

                            UB- I'm amazed, more like dumbfounded, that you said he wasn't phsyically ready. If David Harrison doesn't have the phsyical tools to make it in the league, then no one does. There are very few players that have his size and athleticism. A lot have the size, but not both.

                            He needs a freaking big-man coach BADLY. Until he get's one, there's no way he can become fundamentally ready, emotionally ready, and he won't be able to raise his basketball IQ.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Quick early-season observations

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              That is exactly correct - but last year at this time many Pacers fans were glamoring for DH to start and if only Rick would wise up and play him more he'd be the starting center we need. (I think at the forum party last January it was about 90% of the people wanted DH to start) I strongly argued against that last year, but was no one listened. Now a year later, a few of my forum friends are starting to see the light.

                              Of course I hope DH has a great game tonight and leads the pacers to a huge road win
                              Well I'm one of the people who's been advocating starting David Harrison for a while now, just because I felt like those flashes that we have seen over the last few years might be the real David waiting to break out, but this season I'm already convinced that Rick is correct in not playing David. He has no b-ball IQ and he's not a skilled enough player to overcome that. It's too bad, because I think he's a good lockerroom guy, and I like him a lot.

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              No HSler is. They're drafted on potential, and potential alone. Except for Moses Malone, there really hasn't been a kid that's made the jump that came in ready to play at that level. Yes, Kobe put up pretty good numbers considering, and so did KG, but they weren't ready ready.
                              I don't know, that LeBron kid did pretty well. As did Dwight Howard.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Quick early-season observations

                                Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                                Well I'm one of the people who's been advocating starting David Harrison for a while now, just because I felt like those flashes that we have seen over the last few years might be the real David waiting to break out, but this season I'm already convinced that Rick is correct in not playing David. He has no b-ball IQ and he's not a skilled enough player to overcome that. It's too bad, because I think he's a good lockerroom guy, and I like him a lot.



                                I don't know, that LeBron kid did pretty well. As did Dwight Howard.
                                All I can say about LBJ is touche. For some odd reason, I totally forgot him, which is very hard to do. But Howard still isn't "good" enough. He's athletic enough sure, but skill wise he's no where close and early this year it's showing. For every LeBron and Moses, there's three or more Bender's or Swift's. Hence the reasoning why there was a rule put in place not allowing them to make the jump.

                                On DH. I don't think he should even play, as of now. He can't be expected to make the necessary gains on his own, because it's something you just know, or you learn. It's not an instinct for him, so he has to learn it, and he has no one to learn it from. JO/Al/Foster are all different types of players than he is. The Pacers haven't made the dedication to David, like he's made to the Pacers, unfortunately. He lost weight for them, by all accounts he works hard for them, and what have they done? They haven't signed or hired anyone capable of teaching him. He's got the tools to be an above average center in this league, they just aren't sharp right now. I would hate to see the Ps just let him walk, but I have a feeling it's going to happen. Some team is going to make a vested interest, or already have the ultilities in place, and scoop him up and mold him into what he can become. It's going to be a gloomy day when that happens.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X