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

No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

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

  • #16
    Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
    In the agregate, the Pacers are getting 42.5 rebounds per game, and allowing opponents 43.2.


    Teams that got more rebounds v. the Pacers than their season average, and how the Pacers fared:


    Boston +11 (L)
    Porland +10 (W)
    Chicago +10 (L)
    New Orleans +9 (L)
    Milwaukee +6 (W)
    Golden State +5 (W)
    Charlotte +5 (W)


    Teams that got fewer rebounds against the Pacers than their average:

    New York -3 (W)
    Denver -4 (L)
    Orlando -8 (W)
    Philadelphia -8 (W)

    The other teams were within 1-2 of their average against the Pacers.

    The Pacers have been blown out three times this season.

    Against Washington, turnovers and poor shooting killed the Pacers. They got 10 more rebounds that the Wizards. Against Boston, the Pacers shot lousy, and didn't give themselves enough opportunities for second chance points because of poor rebounding (53-33). Against Denver, the Pacers shot almost the same FG%, and outrebounded the opponent 54-41. The story against Denver was turnovers, free throws and Denver scoring 11 3s.
    Thank you. That is excellent research and although the Pacers won a number of these games letting teams get 10-11 rebounds more than they average is a problem. Most of these are not the elite teams the Pacers will be facing in the playoffs.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

      JO is a half court player as opposed to front court players like Marion, Amare and Dirk. I don't think that is a bad thing either. Overall I think our personel stands out being bigger and stronger at the perimeter. We aren't fast or particularly good shooters.
      "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


      • #18
        Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

        Originally posted by Putnam View Post
        Seth, you are raving.

        You only have to go back one game to Seattle, where the Pacers had an advantage on fast break points.

        The Pacers must get better at fast breaking and fast ball movement. However long it takes, and whoever it takes to get the job done, player-wise and coach-wise.

        It ain't happening now, but nothing good is going to happen for this team until they learn.
        There are fast break points where a guy is ahead of the pack because of a steal or a bad pass.

        I'm talking about a long rebound and you have SOME defense back. The Pacers blow those chances more than any team I can recall. I'm talking about situations that should be dunks or at the very least a foul on the miss, and the Pacers come away with a shot that doesn't even hit the rim.

        Sometimes they do get scores out of them but even those are awkward and perhaps a bit lucky. For example, just a couple of games ago they had a break that ended with the ball bouncing between a bunch of hands, was almost stolen, almost went out of bounds, and then ended up with Tinsley who did a 2 foot baby hook thing.

        Sorry, but a 3 on 2 RUNNING break is not supposed to end that way ever. That's wrong. You don't win games by patting yourself on the back when you do it wrong and catch a good bounce.


        I hate to have to pull video on this to make the case, but I suppose I will have to I guess. I can't believe people watch these games (forget the box score "TO points" or "break points" because those don't show execution or how many were defended) and don't see these endless string of blown fast breaks.

        IMO you should NEVER come away from a full speed 2 on 1 without points. The Pacers may have done this every single game this year at least once. I'm not positive, but it's been extremely common. In several games it's happened more than once.


        On top of all this, it's a problem that I was complaining about 2 seasons ago. It's not a new issue. Last year they had the same thing happening over and over, and I recall a few posters at least agreeing that the Pacers had no FINISHER for these breaks...and that's what I'm getting at. Bad spacing, few real finishers, lots of ball fumbling, late/bad passes, empty trips with a man or 2 advantage and the defense running backward.

        And how about a follower to DUNK those misses. How many times have you seen those chances go empty this year. It JUST HAPPENED last night vs DEN. All the defenders are moving to the baseline due to the speed of the play, leaving things wide open for a trailer to come behind and dunk it...but no one was there.


        The Pacers must get better at fast breaking and fast ball movement. However long it takes, and whoever it takes to get the job done, player-wise and coach-wise.
        It's been 3 years. It is not happening. They have made ZERO progress this season. I didn't post this 3 weeks ago. Now enough is enough.

        Running means you are going to give stuff up the other way. Okay...as long as you can convert your transitions. The Pacers are terrible at it. Defended breakaways are a DISASTER. Not problematic, not a little off right now. They are losing situations for the team and really hurting them.


        I'm not saying walk it up. I'm saying that I'd rather see them set up a HC set in order to avoid giving up something running back the other way if they are going to score defended breaks no better than a regular HC set, and that's the reality of it for them.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

          1st quarter, 9:50 left

          Tinsley tips an entry pass meant for Melo at the rim (oop chance). At this point the Pacers have 4 PLAYERS ahead to the Nuggets 2 (to start the break). The Nuggets react better and turn it into a 4 on 4 race with Tinsley leading the dribble after Foster collected the pass Tins tipped and fed it back to him.

          You have Jack wide left. Foster and JO are side by side in the middle lane trailing Tins (bad spacing).

          Miller runs ahead and turns Tins at the arc, Tins feeds Jack on the wing and he is able to get past Naj. easily since he had to run and quickly turn to defend (and is slower anyway).

          JO and Foster are slowing down and are right next to Tins. This allows Camby and Smith to catch up and space for a possible rebound. Still Jackson has an open layup ahead of all 4 DEN players (Melo was left behind because he was at the baseline when the break started).

          Jack misses the layup. Foster is able to sneak between Smith and Miller to challenge Camby for the rebound. The ball hits the rim and comes to Foster, but instead of a dunk putback (which you know Camby would have done) he tips it off the back of the rim and Denver gets an uncontested rebound. Jeff gets an "offensive rebound" which does NOTHING for the Pacers (a prime example of why I ranted about Jeff in the post-game thread, it happened nearly all night with him).


          This is a good, but not worst case by any stretch, example of what my complaint is. If you watch games and don't see this stuff then I don't know what to tell you. It happens all the time and it's a real problem. Better to just set up JO in the block if you can't make 2 layups on a break with the defense scrambling.


          EDIT - the PxP doesn't show Jeff with an O-REB on this play, I had assumed it was in the count. I'm going through the PxP to see if it matches the box totals, because sometimes they don't. Its still bad for Jeff to miss this, but I wouldn't want to misrepresent it in his stats. Trying to be fair.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

            Oh yeah, that Seattle game where they had an "advantage"...no problem.

            1st quarter, 9:58 to go

            JO gets a defensive board and with the play being at the rim you have 3 Seattle players on the baseline "below" JO and Jeff (if up is the Pacers offensive end, which is how I look at break spacings).

            Tins is out ahead with Luke. Tins is a half step ahead of Luke at HC and Luke is a few feet to the side while Tins is dead-center on the court, ie he is in "front" of everyone else at this point. JO hits him with a good outlet to get this situation.

            Wilcox starts this play right next to Jeff, above him by 1 step. The Pacers are starting ahead of each of their guys on a man to man basis. Just every Pacer running if his SEA counterpart runs gives the Pacers numbers at the other rim, expect Jeff being even with Wilcox.

            On the dribble Tinsley has to slow down, Luke cuts him off but is still backpeddling and Tins goes behind the back so he can pass Luke on the right for a layup chance.

            Tins pulls up which leaves Luke falling out of the play into the baseline. Open baby jump/layup for Tins...but here comes Wilcox now a full 4-5 steps ahead of Foster. Wilcox BLOCKS the shot, it goes into the rim/backboard and into Luke's hands, Foster is never involved in the play.

            Sonics get the ball and you see Collison coming into the play. Not JO, not Al.

            And STILL the Sonics are able to break on this. Luke naturally gets ahead of Tins because Tinsley was headed upcourt when his shot was blocked while Luke had already started going the other way when he caught the rebound.

            Still Wilcox and Collison are behind the play leaving JO, Al and Jack to defend. Jack cuts off Luke, then follows the pass over to Ray (Jack helped on Tins' man, then went back to his man).

            Ray shows an up-fake and drives by Jack as he tries to close out (which is what happens when you are forced to close out on shooters that can drive). JO comes to help on Ray, fine, so Ray dishes it to...

            Wilcox, who is now 4-5 steps ahead of Foster coming back the other way. Wilcox goes for the dunk and is fouled by Tinsley (misses dunk as ball comes out). He makes both FTs. 0 points for Indy on the break, 2 given up.



            Again, I like Foster and I like him starting. I didn't pick either of these because of him. I literally FFWD into both games till the first Pacers break. Both were misses, both happened to involved Jeff. But they also featured Tins and Jack not getting scores or fouls on their shots, as well as no JO or Al for whatever reasons.

            The point isn't to trash Jeff here, or Tins and Jack. The point is to make clear examples of what I mean when I say "no more fast breaks because you aren't any good at them". They aren't.

            If it's Melo instead of Jack it's a dunk, not a layup miss. If it's Camby it's a dunk follow-up, not a weak one handed tip miss. If it's Luke instead of Tinsley it's a foul or a dish to Foster who could have easily dunked behind the aggressive Wilcox going for the block.

            But it's not those players in the BnG. The guys this team has just don't do this sort of thing well, they don't score well in transition traffic.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

              I attended the Golden State game last Wednesday in person (didn't post a game report, since by the time I got back home from Oakland it was pretty late and everyone else had summed up most of my thoughts on the game).

              Everyone in the group I attended with noticed the fast break problem. As others have mentioned, there was a clear lack of spacing and no real finisher on what seemed like practically every fast break.

              You'd see three Pacers all ahead of defenders, but they'd be crowding the same side of the floor, trying to figure out on the fly who was the decoy and who was the finisher.

              Or you'd have a guard (such as Tinsley) who'd run the break so fast that no other players could catch up (or maybe the other players were just too slow to run), and then the player with the ball would either have to stop and wait for teammates to catch up (allowing the defense to get set) or would go ahead and take a pull-up jumper or contested layup against the one or two defenders who'd gotten back - and miss the shot, with the Warriors getting the rebound.

              I swear this happened over and over again throughout the game, to the point where we were groaning halfway through every Pacers fast break. Without looking at the stats, I'm guessing we ran 7 or 8 fast breaks on turnovers and converted maybe one or two the whole night.

              It's almost as if the players haven't PRACTICED the fast break enough or else don't have any sort of fast break "plays" set up. Guys are trying to pass/run up the court but they don't know where they're supposed to be or who is doing what until it's too late and the defense has set.

              I feel like the solution is better coaching and more practice of this situation. The other elements are already there - we're often able to cause turnovers and get the ball up the floor very quickly. That's 2/3 of the battle right there. The missing piece is executing the break properly so an open guy has the ball in scoring position at the right time (i.e. with defenders out of the way).

              At the moment, things look very out-of-sync. Hopefully it's because most of these players still have only played 15 or 20 games together...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                Just like to point out that NBA teams don't actually, um, practice. Not really anyway, not like a college team might.

                They have to figure these things out as they go. I'm really down on this year's team, but this is one aspect I do think we'll get better at. We have guys who can pass, guys who can finish, just gotta get comfortable and put it all together.
                2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  Okay, has it begun to sink in that this team can not run a good break with any level of quality, at least on a consistant basis? They were this way the last 2 years and it's not changed.

                  They have been blowing all sorts of mismatch breakaways. 2 on 1s that end up as misses, charges, balls off of fingertips....

                  I realize that Jack was apparently hurt on that last play for him when he just ended up with nowhere to go and gave up on it (or couldn't move because of the knee perhaps), but honestly that was par for course with this team and fast breaks.


                  I get it, they can't do it. Stop trying and focus on doing what you can do well. I've been all for early offense, getting down into the half court quickly. But please just stop pretending that somehow there is going to be this great long outlet pass that leads to some touch passes between 2 guys till one flies in for the dunk ala Worthy or Jordan.

                  It ain't happening - ever. It's okay, it's not the Pacers' thing. I'm not mad that they can't do it. I'm mad that they can't do it but keep trying to force it to happen.



                  Okay, sometimes they do get them. I just don't consider 15% or whatever their conversion rate on fast break attempts is to be a quality scoring rate, especially when it seems like those 85% end up coming back the other way for easy scores by the opponent.
                  I thought that you were the one leading the charge for a more atheltic team so that they could play an uptempo game.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                    Bulldog, like I said, it's been a problem before this year. There was hope that the new guys might fix that, but only Rawle and Baston look like guys that do this part of the game well...and James White who is gone and wouldn't have been on the court anyway.

                    JO, Tins, Jack, Foster have never been great with the spacing. Foster can run the floor and throw it down, though he's looking a little slower this year. Daniels is not any more of a flier than Jack is. Al isn't either.

                    Granger hasn't really shown great knowledge for these situations either, and as I pointed out elsewhere discussing his desire to shoot outside he often runs to the arc on breaks ala Reggie Miller. I'd rather see him trying to be more like Pippen on breaks.

                    I just don't see it getting better because if it was then I would have seen it last year. It's been bugging me for a couple of seasons and I used to post about it in Star game threads every other week it seemed. It's been so ugly this year I just blew a gasket about it. I can't stands no more...


                    BTW, if you saw the LAL game tonight it featured a lot more of these duds. They had far better finishes at the rim from HC plays than anything they got out of breaks.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                      Seth, thanks for the detailed descriptions you posted in #19 and #20 above. Your photos and play analysis is always apprecfiated., and you make the argument strongly that the Pacers are poor at pushing the ball upcourt.

                      I just want to ask, why do you recommend giving up rather than redoubling the effort to develop this side of the game. I recognize that the latter course could mean personnel changes and probably won't be achieved this season. But isn't speed an essential part of the game?
                      And I won't be here to see the day
                      It all dries up and blows away
                      I'd hang around just to see
                      But they never had much use for me
                      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Bulldog, like I said, it's been a problem before this year. There was hope that the new guys might fix that, but only Rawle and Baston look like guys that do this part of the game well...and James White who is gone and wouldn't have been on the court anyway.
                        I agree. I know it might seem like piling on a guy I don't like, meh... I really don't care, Tinsley has horrible judgement when it comes to fastbreaks. I'm especially talking about situations when he pushes the break with his dribble (he's pretty good at making the long outlet pass). He holds onto the ball too long, giving it up too late or not at all.

                        Saras and DA are really pretty good at running the break but nothing special compared to guys like Nash, Andre Miller, Hinrich, TJ Ford, or Jason Kidd. That's why I think the Pacers won't excell in an uptempo offense - they need a PG with better decision-making skills. I'm sure someone will disagree but Anthony Johnson is better than Tinsley in passing out of the fastbreak offense.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                          Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                          Seth, thanks for the detailed descriptions you posted in #19 and #20 above. Your photos and play analysis is always apprecfiated., and you make the argument strongly that the Pacers are poor at pushing the ball upcourt.

                          I just want to ask, why do you recommend giving up rather than redoubling the effort to develop this side of the game. I recognize that the latter course could mean personnel changes and probably won't be achieved this season. But isn't speed an essential part of the game?
                          Why? Because they are MUCH better at it. I think tonight vs Orlando you saw that. They only had perhaps one or 2 decent breaks, with a couple of others turning into those same old awkward bunny jumps and stuff. I like the points when they get them, but when they miss it almost always leads to a score the other way.

                          What they did well tonight was to get into some early offense sets, like a PnR just as the defense is getting set and finding matchups. Say at the 18-19 mark. One PnR they just ran before ORL had their footing and they were by them with a return pass and score just like that.


                          SARAS is great in transition, and I think he was part of all the good ones. The only non-Saras that was decent was the somewhat awkward pass to a trailing Foster for the dunk. And even that play proves my point because when was the last time you saw a "trailer" on any of these breaks? It's so rare it stands out.

                          Anyway, point being that while Saras can run, he's also strong in HC. Tinsley is also a stong HC passer, but a little too careless and sometimes awkward on breaks. Al is a great mismatch in the HC with his outside shot. JO is outstanding at drawing doubles (even triples tonight) and contrary to JO haters' opinions, he's becoming a really solid passer from the post (we've seen some pretty clever bounce passes in traffic from him lately even).

                          Jack is by far a better HC guy, especially if you can drive him baseline on a GnG or ISO. Foster can run, but he's a extra possession type rebounder that does the most damage when he has time to setup his position. Daniels is like Jack, he's even less likely to fly in for a dunk and he's not that great a pure layup guy (which shows when he drives to the cup I think). He's better getting himself a short jumper off the dribble.


                          What it all adds up to IMO is that the team has a LOT of strong HC talent, which also tends to help ease the defensive load created by lots of transition. So you accept what you are and try to be the very best version of that you can.

                          On most nights I think the Pacers hold several advantages in HC style pairings, but almost no advantages in transition game style play. You want to play on your terms and emphasize those advantages.

                          Arroyo would rather have been 1 on 1 on breaks vs Tinsley than having to go PnR only to find JO or Baston waiting inside on him. But at the other end Arroyo's defensive speed had very limited impact on defending the HC game.


                          So I still like EARLY offense, moving the ball up quickly and getting into a set. I'm not against a great outlet that leads to a break score, but I would back off pushing this as a main goal.

                          Honestly IMO Rick already has taken his foot off the peddle and that's where we started seeing some signs of improved play (barring the LA game and the 2nd half of the DEN game).


                          Everyone is so sure that the game is going to be this high-flying game, but I don't buy it completely. Some of that is hype. There is always room for HC play and fundamentals rather than trying to run out for free scores on every rebound. Just 2 years ago people were even saying that it was this loose style that was going to PREVENT the Suns from winning a title.

                          I look out West and see the HC Spurs and the early offense but HC oriented Mavs tearing it up, along with the Triangle in LA. And Sloan's Jazz? No, he's not a fun and gun coach either, despite their higher scoring. Van Gundy's Rockets? Please, Jeff is as HC slog as it gets, even with T-Mac on the team.

                          I think someone pulled a fast one on the East and talked them into believing that fastbreaks were the style of the future, but most of the best teams out West don't even buy that or play that way.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                            Fair is fair, in the 2nd half of the Portland game the team pulled off a slew of quality breaks.

                            A majority of these featured Tinsley making great passes or moves. One was the behind the back in traffic to make the layup, another was a late dish to the trailing Baston for a dunk.

                            Jack and Baston were also quality factors in these breaks. Baston spaced well on a couple of them, as did Jack (or Baston helped make it look that way). Jack had one that was good but not great when Dixon lunged for the steal and got crossed quickly without slowing Jack down at all. Bad defense, but credit Jack for playing it correctly and keeping the easy score on track.

                            And I'm not counting the stuff like where Jack was ahead of the pack because I've never said they couldn't make plays that are uncontested. I'm talking about having to make moves or passes to score around or over 1 or more transition defenders. Also not counting the couple of times they broke down a full court press because that's also been fine most of the year, and was again last night.


                            Probably anyone around here who had read this thread and watched the 2nd half last night was thinking "um, what do you call this". I call it UNUSUAL, but very nice.

                            If I'd been seeing this stuff the last 2+ years on a regular basis I never would have started this thread. Maybe it was Portland too, but typically weaker teams haven't made it look better in the past.

                            Anyway, I sure hope its here to stay. I like it as a SUPPLEMENT to good HC offense. Finally some layups and dunks off of breaks.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                              Bump for the Houston game. Nuff said I think. This was an unfortunate display of exactly what I've been complaining about with almost all of their breaks turned away with missed shots, fumbles, etc.

                              Seems like about the only breaks they score on are when it's truly an uncontested one (like 1 guy out in front of everyone).

                              Either practice this stuff or don't even bother. That is especially true for Jackson who seems to be the king of botched breaks

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Bump for the Houston game. Nuff said I think. This was an unfortunate display of exactly what I've been complaining about with almost all of their breaks turned away with missed shots, fumbles, etc.

                                Seems like about the only breaks they score on are when it's truly an uncontested one (like 1 guy out in front of everyone).

                                Either practice this stuff or don't even bother. That is especially true for Jackson who seems to be the king of botched breaks

                                they definitely need to do some drills...you can put Nash or Kidd with these guys and they'll still make a mess out of all these fast breaks...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X