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

JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

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

  • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

    Originally posted by rexnom View Post
    Thank you.

    JO is our franchise guy. We are so underappreciating him. I can't believe this. We have one of few dominant big men in the league and he can never seem to do right with some of you.

    I think Jermaine's brought this all onto himself rather than us underappreciating. He's made little effort this season to establish good offensive position or to use his strengths, which is strange after all the working out he did in the offseason.

    I think he'll always have issues because he's sensitive, and as long as he's the team leader they'll have to cater to his needs, which they have done quite excessively.

    I hope he does what he says, and works to get good position. It would make a crazy difference.

    Comment


    • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

      I guess I don't see Saras and Foster being accused of bad performance. Or at least, they don't deserve to be accused of bad performance.

      They aren't very good players. But they're not performing badly.

      Foster is the typical one-trick-pony. He's a hustle player, but he offers little in terms of offensive help. And while he offers defensive help, it comes with a price - he's a lousy post defender, forcing JO or someone else to do the dirty work. Many of the Foster critics (myself included) don't dislike Foster as much as we dislike what Foster does to JO. The solution isn't to get Foster more minutes, its to find the right way to use him in order to maximize his production. Rick's infatuation with Foster is greatly exaggerated around here - even when Foster started Rick kept a tight grip on his minutes, realizing that expanding Foster's minutes per game did not result in a better team performance. There's a bit of "calculus" invovled because there's a curve - to get the maximum performance without maximizing his minutes.

      Saras is interesting, he seems to have the uncanny ability this season to make a number of high-profile good and high-profile bad plays.

      Unfortunately for Saras, his fans (many of which came here before you) did him such a disservice by over-hyping what he's actually capable of doing and there's a still a lot of backlash. Does Saras deserve it? No. (Do some of his more-trolling fans deserve it? I don't know.) But there always seems to be a new wave of reinforcements coming in here to tell us that Saras is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and our coaches are too stupid to figure it out, and Indiana basketball fans are too stupid to figure it out. Or words to that effect. And the fact continues to be that Saras played his way to the third-string last year, and he seems to be about to fall behind Orien Greene (and Darrell Armstrong) in the rotation this year (which would be fourth-string, if my math is correct). Outside of hitting his shot better, he seems to be even worse at the basics of the PG position (and I've noticed that a large percentage of Saras' minutes have come at SG again, which is sure to infuriate his fans but he's just not an NBA-caliber PG.)
      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


      • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

        Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
        My goodness, buddy,

        You've taken over-reacting to a new extreme.

        The only heated discussion JO should've had following the Celtics game should've involved himself and a mirror.

        -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


        • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

          The same applies for Rick Carlisle for the boneheaded gameplan that took JO away from the paint in the first place.

          EDIT - for all you know, Bird called them both into the office to yell at each of them for this mess.
          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


          • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

            Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
            The same applies for Rick Carlisle for the boneheaded gameplan that took JO away from the paint in the first place.
            I'm with Bball on this one, as I usually am when it comes to JO.

            But here's the problem. Even when Jermaine goes down to the low post, he still plays as if he's a shooting guard. Jermaine is one of the least physical big-men out there when it comes to playing close to the basket. I will admit, defensively, he does a much better job of contesting and blocking shots which proves that he is not afraid of some contact. On the offensive end, however, he doesn't like people touching him or getting into his grill.

            When he gets the ball in the low post, we're going to see him do what he loves to do most. A couple bangs to feel out his defender - turn - fade away jump shot. Sure, he's playing closer to the basket...but it's not like he's doing much outside of jump shooting.

            It's not difficult to see why Jermaine wants to retreat back to the low-post. Based on statistics (which I believe JO over-values), he has been most successful in the slow-it-down, JO-ball. All of a sudden, his statistics aren't as good this year and it seems to me like he wants to go back to his comfort zone...a place where he felt most comfortable. What about the rest of the team?

            Comment


            • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

              He's not asking to slow it down.

              He's saying, when we're in the halfcourt, give me the ball where I play the best. That's all. You guys have turned this into a bunch of things it is not.

              In what world is it possibly wrong for him to make that request? He IS the team's #1 option, whether we like it or not. He should get the ball in his comfort zone.

              Can somebody find a youtube video of JO in the post during prior to the last two seasons. JO's a damn good post player offensively. I don't believe that Rick has completely destroyed that, but the longer Rick is here the more I wonder if firing Isiah and replacing him and Mark Aguirre with Rick and no big-man coach really was a good idea or not.

              For all of Isiah's flaws, (and I can list about 397,209,947 of them) he seemed to understand how to use JO better than Rick does.
              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


              • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post

                They aren't very good players. But they're not performing badly.
                I agree. But that's why they don't get very much money. Saras was brought to be a backup. And that's fair.
                And we all know stories, when players in one team play better, in other worse. The players performance depends on his abilities, negatives and for what team he plays, how he fits in there.

                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                Unfortunately for Saras, his fans (many of which came here before you) did him such a disservice by over-hyping what he's actually capable of doing and there's a still a lot of backlash. Does Saras deserve it? No. (Do some of his more-trolling fans deserve it? I don't know.) But there always seems to be a new wave of reinforcements coming in here to tell us that Saras is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and our coaches are too stupid to figure it out, and Indiana basketball fans are too stupid to figure it out. Or words to that effect.
                . Now I understand (I realize PD was like a war field, and some of the posters negative opinions about Saras is like a natural reaction against Saras praisers).

                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                And the fact continues to be that Saras played his way to the third-string last year, and he seems to be about to fall behind Orien Greene (and Darrell Armstrong) in the rotation this year (which would be fourth-string, if my math is correct). Outside of hitting his shot better, he seems to be even worse at the basics of the PG position (and I've noticed that a large percentage of Saras' minutes have come at SG again, which is sure to infuriate his fans but he's just not an NBA-caliber PG.)
                Yes, I see how he gets the ball upcourt, passes and goes to the corner and that's all. But also yesterday I didn't see team ball at all. Who gets the ball - 1-2 passes - shoots from whatever position. And Saras, when he gets the ball rare, he shoots too, and there are no help, it's like everybody have to play one on one usually. Too many individual plays imo. Defensive rebounding is awful, not much opportunities for fast points. And that play don't fit for Saras.
                He isn't performing well also not playing much and maybe in other team he would fit better I don't know but yes, maybe he isn't an NBA caliber PG. There are not enough evidence to say he is or is not NBA caliber. Not Pacers caliber - probably yes.
                "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                - Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                  The same applies for Rick Carlisle for the boneheaded gameplan that took JO away from the paint in the first place.

                  Yeah, Rick has done little to establish JO down low.

                  Comment


                  • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                    He's not asking to slow it down.

                    He's saying, when we're in the halfcourt, give me the ball where I play the best. That's all. You guys have turned this into a bunch of things it is not.

                    In what world is it possibly wrong for him to make that request? He IS the team's #1 option, whether we like it or not. He should get the ball in his comfort zone.

                    Can somebody find a youtube video of JO in the post during prior to the last two seasons. JO's a damn good post player offensively. I don't believe that Rick has completely destroyed that, but the longer Rick is here the more I wonder if firing Isiah and replacing him and Mark Aguirre with Rick and no big-man coach really was a good idea or not.

                    For all of Isiah's flaws, (and I can list about 397,209,947 of them) he seemed to understand how to use JO better than Rick does.

                    I agree 100%. JO progressed more in the two and a half years under Isiah than his three years under Rick. In fact, I think the mvp candidate Jermaine during the 61 win season(I'm still waiting for the banner, by the way) was more of a product of Isiah's development than Rick's coaching. I think in the last three years we've actually seen Jermaine regress. Yes, he's developed a better 8-10 foot shot, his passing game has gotten a lot better, and he's gotten smarter about his ability to block shots, but he's not the same player who could dominate a game, or change the game for the better.

                    All of this may be due to the disaster of the last two years and the toll it's taken on him, or the pressures of him trying to be "the man", or the fact that tptb haven't been developing him well and Jermaine hasn't taken it upon himself to develop on his own. He has turned into a 7 foot, sf with above average defensive skills, and he's moved away from being a dominator in the paint. I think that was most evident in the Chicago loss last week. He couldn't get a spot-shot or turn around jumper off on Wallace, but he also couldn't take it right at Wallace either. He's become weak in the post and around the basket offensively, but his mid-range game has only improved marginally.

                    I'd love to eat my words though...

                    Comment


                    • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                      It seems this board has a number of posters who are looking into taking over from Oliver Stone & Co if we are to read into their theories.

                      In the end it all however boils down to "bash the star" which is so easy, he either makes to much money or doesn't work hard enough, or there are a legion of other unsubstantiated ideologies thrown at it/him.


                      Upon the remarks that JO played in the post against Boston, I decided to watch the game once more up close to see if I could find JO in the post, getting the ball and making a move.

                      nope.

                      he gets into the post ONCE on his own move and indeed got blocked, because he had 3 defenders around him and no one to get the ball to.

                      I saw JO defend 4 on 1 3 times, and stop them all 3 times only to see on two occasions that his teammates then not catching the ball but tipping it to the Boston players. the only time it went "right" was when Danny got involved and hustled the ball out of bounds to Boston.

                      I saw Wally definitely plain afraid to get into the paint, after being stuffed 3 tiems in a row.
                      I saw PP decide that the paint was not his area, and I saw Perkins try it a few times, only to get pulled after he was stuffed twice in a row.

                      What I saw in the minutes JO played was no opponent ready to challenge him in the paint, it was his territory, the only times they scored in the paint were when JO was out or twice when he was taking over defense from Jax or Al who "forgot" to guard their man.

                      What i saw on offense was a JO that was constantly drawing double and tripple teams, finding the cutter if there was one, but alway with no exception , getting the ball on the top of the key.

                      I saw a good passing JO, didn't those same people complain last year he couldn't pass?

                      I saw him make moves that ended in a score, once he went down low with the ball himself.

                      I saw Al and Jax getting the ball and shoot, Al didn't work on defense, got into trouble several time and hardly did any rebounding.

                      I saw a player that is one of the best in the game today, staying with a gameplan drawn up by his coach, I saw him hustle every minute of the game, I saw him work hard, very hard.
                      I saw other players breaking offensive sets clearly severaL times to take their own chances, leaving guys like JT and JO flustered awaiting on the court.

                      I saw every reason why he went to Rick to vent.

                      Then I listened to the Carlisle show, and heard Rick explain that it is not special, strange or something else that this happened, that he understood the frustration and that it was good, and that it was JO's job (or at least part of) as leader of the team to do these things.

                      I heard the Boston tv crew say what JO said after the game all during the game, while funny enough when I listened to Slick and Mark, Slick was saying the exact same.


                      But yeah I agree; let's get rid of one of the best (if not THE best) players the Pacers ever had in their NBA days.

                      At least we can go back to saying we're young, un-experienced, ahve the wrong coach, need a vet and only the good lord knows what more we can come up with.

                      Better still, we already have JO's replacement in Al and Baston and then we can play Harrison at C, wo do we fear, championship here we come!
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                        In the end it all however boils down to "bash the star" which is so easy, he either makes to much money or doesn't work hard enough, or there are a legion of other unsubstantiated ideologies thrown at it/him.
                        I don't really see anyone bashing him for making too much money, but there is criticism from me about his effort. Not bashing though.



                        I saw JO defend 4 on 1 3 times, and stop them all 3 times only to see on two occasions that his teammates then not catching the ball but tipping it to the Boston players. the only time it went "right" was when Danny got involved and hustled the ball out of bounds to Boston.
                        It's not a stop, imo, until we regain possession, but it's hard for Jermaine to be expected to get stops in those situations. His teammates need to get back.

                        I saw Wally definitely plain afraid to get into the paint, after being stuffed 3 tiems in a row.
                        I saw PP decide that the paint was not his area, and I saw Perkins try it a few times, only to get pulled after he was stuffed twice in a row.
                        Definitely true.

                        What I saw in the minutes JO played was no opponent ready to challenge him in the paint, it was his territory, the only times they scored in the paint were when JO was out or twice when he was taking over defense from Jax or Al who "forgot" to guard their man.
                        There were quite a few plays where this happened; more than two. They were consistently getting into the paint by the third quarter. When Jermaine was taken out it stopped happening and when he came back in started happening on the first play. It's not Jermaine's fault that we couldn't stop dribble penetration when he was in, coincidentally, but he was responsible for watching the ball as opposed to attempting to block the shot at times or box out.


                        What i saw on offense was a JO that was constantly drawing double and tripple teams, finding the cutter if there was one, but alway with no exception , getting the ball on the top of the key.
                        I saw Jermaine standing around and not getting to his screens quick enough when he decided to move.

                        I saw a good passing JO, didn't those same people complain last year he couldn't pass?
                        Jermaine's a good passer and he does a good job looking for his teammates.

                        Al didn't work on defense, got into trouble several time and hardly did any rebounding.
                        Al was the only player busting his a** on most every play. Jermaine finished with 12 rebounds, which nearly half came in the first half of the first quarter, Al finished with 6. So they were basically tied after the first stretch.

                        I saw him hustle every minute of the game, I saw him work hard, very hard.
                        I wish I could say that, but I can't. I saw him give up on a couple of plays, just flat out give up. Which is why I think he went out in the third quarter. I want Jermaine to succeed more than anyone on the team, but I can't say he's free of criticism.

                        Comment


                        • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                          I guess I don't see Saras and Foster being accused of bad performance. Or at least, they don't deserve to be accused of bad performance.

                          They aren't very good players. But they're not performing badly.

                          Foster is the typical one-trick-pony. He's a hustle player, but he offers little in terms of offensive help. And while he offers defensive help, it comes with a price - he's a lousy post defender, forcing JO or someone else to do the dirty work. Many of the Foster critics (myself included) don't dislike Foster as much as we dislike what Foster does to JO. The solution isn't to get Foster more minutes, its to find the right way to use him in order to maximize his production. Rick's infatuation with Foster is greatly exaggerated around here - even when Foster started Rick kept a tight grip on his minutes, realizing that expanding Foster's minutes per game did not result in a better team performance. There's a bit of "calculus" invovled because there's a curve - to get the maximum performance without maximizing his minutes.

                          Saras is interesting, he seems to have the uncanny ability this season to make a number of high-profile good and high-profile bad plays.

                          Unfortunately for Saras, his fans (many of which came here before you) did him such a disservice by over-hyping what he's actually capable of doing and there's a still a lot of backlash. Does Saras deserve it? No. (Do some of his more-trolling fans deserve it? I don't know.) But there always seems to be a new wave of reinforcements coming in here to tell us that Saras is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and our coaches are too stupid to figure it out, and Indiana basketball fans are too stupid to figure it out. Or words to that effect. And the fact continues to be that Saras played his way to the third-string last year, and he seems to be about to fall behind Orien Greene (and Darrell Armstrong) in the rotation this year (which would be fourth-string, if my math is correct). Outside of hitting his shot better, he seems to be even worse at the basics of the PG position (and I've noticed that a large percentage of Saras' minutes have come at SG again, which is sure to infuriate his fans but he's just not an NBA-caliber PG.)

                          I see that you have taken the Seth approach,take a thread about JO and turn it into a Foster, Sars bashfest.

                          Comment


                          • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post

                            Unfortunately for Saras, his fans (many of which came here before you) did him such a disservice by over-hyping what he's actually capable of doing and there's a still a lot of backlash.
                            Are Jax's and JO's fanboys just as bad? I see them here all the time. Why don't they inspire the same kind of hatred Saras' fanboys do?
                            2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                            Comment


                            • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                              Originally posted by Whiteone View Post
                              I see that you have taken the Seth approach,take a thread about JO and turn it into a Foster, Sars bashfest.
                              I did nothing of the sort.

                              I was responding to (admittedly off-topic) +/- comments related to Saras and Foster that were posted by others.

                              I didn't start it. But I will finish it.

                              BTW, did you ever elaborate on this,

                              Originally posted by Jay
                              Originally posted by Whiteone View Post
                              Yeah let's put the loss on Sars and Foster, your agenda is not loss on me.
                              What agenda?

                              Please elaborate. I have no idea what you're talking about.
                              Because if you did, I missed it. And I'm waiting for you to better explain whatever it is you're trying to say.
                              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


                              • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                                Euro friends,

                                We've had numerous discussions at PD of the pitfalls of individual player +/- (especially the one as reported by Pacers.com) over the years.

                                I even built a database to track five-man +/- on here a few seasons ago (I think a lot of that was "lost in the fire" however.) Since then, 82games.com has signficantly expanded its use of five-man +/-, which is the ONLY meaningful basketball stat in my opinion (the only time I look at a box score is to see if there is numerical evidence to corroborate something I've observed during a game, or I'll glance at the box-score on my way to the offical play-by-play).
                                According to 82games, here are our 10 most effective lineups so far:

                                1. Tinsley-Jackson-Granger-Harrington-O'Neal
                                2. Tinsley-Daniels-Jackson-Harrington-O'Neal
                                3. Tinsley-Jackson-Granger-O'Neal-Foster
                                4. Tinsley-Jackson-Granger-Harrington-Foster
                                5. Tinsley-Daniels-Jackson-O'Neal-Foster
                                6. Armstrong-Daniels-Jackson-O'Neal-Foster
                                7. Jasikevicius-Marshall-Powell-Granger-Harrison
                                8. Armstrong-Jasikevicius-Daniels-Harrington-Foster
                                9. Jasikevicius-Daniels-Marshall-Harrington-Foster
                                10. Armstrong-Jasikevicius-Daniels-Harrington-Harrison

                                It's only 8 games, but that's the 5-man +/- at this time.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X