Tweet
It looks like everyone is sleeping in Indiana or just sick to their stomachs over losing tonight. Three in a row. I don't have much to say just feeling let down with our play. I know that it is the last game of the road trip, but we have to find a way to win games like tonight. We had our chance when Kobe went down. I kept wondering where Al was at all night. I didn't actually watch the game on TV, it was a Gamecast night. So someone who watched give us something positive beside Baston playing good tonight.
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.
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
-
Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP -
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
I actually already posted this in the game thread but I want it in the post game thread. So I'm copy/pasting.
I think a critical coaching error lost this game. At the 9:21 mark in the fourth the Lakers called a timeout. Runi, Armstrong,Daniels, Granger and Baston were on the floor. We'd just cut the lead to ten. Runi was in for 12+ minutes, Armstrong for about 5, Daniels about 6, Baston about 7 and Granger about 9. We're on the last game of a long road trip. These guys are scratching and clawing to get back in this game and are tired. The whole team is standing on the sidelines, so nobody is just maxin' and relaxin' they're ready to come in. We come out of the timeout with the same tired lineup and promptly miss our next five shots when fresh legs would've been the answer at that point. I realize these guys played their hearts out and all but come on 10 point game, 9 minutes to go, completely fresh starting five, no Kobe, Odom has 5 fouls if we convert just two of those five possesions it changes the last 9 minutes completely. -
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Very bad game. Just a flat effort from the blue & gold tonight. Lakers gave us a chance in the middle fo the 4th but we couldn't catch fire.
Positives: Baston played really well tonight. He played his way into the rotation tonight after Rick had been giving him a handful of minutes the last few games.
Oh yeah and Runi played solid. Other than that the rest of the team was already thinking about their in-flight meals on the way home.
Like I said earlier, 9-10 is close enough to 10-9. Should be better, but at least we aren't worse.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Roster movement must be made. Now's the time to make a strong push for Corey Maggette imo. Quis + Harrison might just get it done.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
it will never happen but damn please fire Carlisle. well we just resigned him, so there goes the real solution.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
You might just have something there... I do agree something has to be done. I believe many people have said we should wait til twenty games before we pass judgement, well I would say that we are close enough.Originally posted by Quis View Post
A change must be made!Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - APComment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Well, the Pacers were plagued by the same problems they have been all season. Rebounding was a problem (outrebounded 41-28). Defense was a problem (Lakers scored 60 pts in the first half and shot 51% for the game). Pacers also struggled to score and found themselves down 20 pts in the first half (Jeez, how many games has that happened this season? I've lost count.)
You could attribute all these problems to fatigue I guess. That would be understandable. However, they've had these problems all season, with little to no improvement.
JO had a double-double tonight, but he was REALLY limited by his foul trouble. After he picked up his first foul in the first quarter, he stopped playing aggressive defense. Kwame Brown (?!) just went to town on him because JO was scared to foul. He did end up fouling out, so maybe he knew what was coming. Still, it didn't help out that Kwame could just score at will.
And how about Maceo Baston? Best game in his NBA career. But it wasn't just his scoring. I thought he played good defense and just good overall while he was in there.
----------------------------------------------------------
I know we're just a little over a month into the season. We're just one game under .500. It's still early. There's plenty of time for improvement. BUT...
If we're still exhibiting the exact same problems one month from now, isn't it time for a change? By that point, it should be clear that something doesn't fit. Be it player(s), coach, or style of play, something probably needs to change.
I'd lean more towards moving player(s) than anything else. Or just changing the style of play. But if we're really committed to the uptempo style, then it's time to bring in Rick Adelman. That would probably have to wait until the offseason, of course. Hell, maybe management needs a change. I don't know. Kiki Vandeweghe is available...
All I know is that something isn't working. And I don't think it's going to solve itself.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
I think at this point, I'm having a little Pacers hangover after coming to the realization that we're probably going to be a .500 team again, and don't have a draft pick this year. To me, this means we're going to be treading water or slowly sinking until we make 2 or more moves. I enjoy that the players like each other, but I'd also like to see some wins. Just a little disheartening to think that we're not contending, but we're not really improving either. That's a statement I haven't been able to say since, what, 1993?Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
You're probably right, but that's a no-win situation for Carlisle.Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
If he put fresh legs in and they struggled, we'd see plenty of posts like: "Stupid Carlisle and his egg timer! There he goes, making decisions based on what his little card tells him! Why did he take out that lineup? They were playing well and he took them out!"
Anyway, I think the game was lost long before that situation.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
jo to chicago for thomas, deng, and nyk 1st rd pick. add in some fillers on both ends and we've got ourselves a deal.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
I agree that it was a mistake to leave Armstrong out there, but I think Sarunas looked fine energy-wise past that point. DA never did look solid, despite his energy he was overmatched.
Baston I thought looked fine still too. But I did think to myself "hey, F Kobe, if Phil won't play him who cares - get Tins and either Al or Jack back out there right now to help with some scoring now that you are back in it".
As you noted they kept going with what they had and it cost them.
Honestly, while JO scored pretty well all night, almost all of it was away from the rim, even the low post turnarounds and stuff. I felt like JO and Harrington were big disappointments against Walton and Kwame. They actually were outplayed by them most of the night, and JO didn't really get it going till his final return IMO.
Sarunas played his best game of the year. Granted most of it was vs Farmar and he still had some really poor mistakes. But for the most part he made the offense go, he got things started when he was out there.
Baston was also outstanding, definitely the best he's played yet. Some of it was Bynum, but even the few times he was in against Brown he played it well. It wasn't the dunks that impressed me, those were plays he's been making and are his speciality. No, I was impressed by his court awareness which often led to him making better defensive plays overall and helped get him a couple of his buckets.
The oop was not one of them, that was just standard Maccabi PnR done to perfection. Man do I wish we could see 2-3 of those every game. That pass by Saras was the best pass he's made all year (to the rim, just ahead of Odom's hands). Only Baston could get that ball, and credit him for being deceptively quick up to it. I didn't think they had it and then all of the sudden he was throwing it down.
Granger was a train-wreck half the time (per usual) and then brilliant at other times. I know it's the standard line out of me by this point, but he's just so green. His best offensive play was when the ball got bounced around and came back to him and he took it to the lane. It just shows that he can get a shot similar to what Daniels gets if he will just get comfortable putting the dribble down to the lane.
Of course Danny also had the dud play of the night when he let the rim block a wide-open dunk. He also just left Odom on a break once where I was saying "hey, where are you going, the guy you are with has the ball still". Oh well, Rome wasn't built in a day.
Jack was so-so. We knew that Kobe would get the best of him but he had a few chances to really make him pay that he got outplayed on (like that runout for a layup that got blocked - good idea, bad execution/ability at the end).
Tinsley - unimpressive, mostly outplayed by Parker and that's not acceptable anymore than JO and Al struggling with Brown and Walton was.
If it was just Kobe and Odom then I could see. I know the Lakers have some other talent, but come on, Al and JO are supposed to be strong advantages, and Tins vs Parker should be one too. Didn't look like it tonight.
Foster was pleantly active on offense tonight, but he was toasted pretty regularly on defense himself. Baston was often playing in place of Jeff, and for good reason considering the defense.
The fact is that Kobe had limited minutes and the Pacers still couldn't get it done. I guess the positive is that Sarunas and Baston both showed strong energy and solid games, and Granger kept the energy up even after the embarrassing dunk miss and made some strong plays.
2 other signs of hope - chemistry plays. The Jack runout I mentioned was not shown on TV but just as a shot was going up I saw him look at Tins who was under the rim and ready to catch the made shot. Jack immediate took off which was a smart way to pressure Kobe. The director missed the play till the end which featured Jack ahead of everyone and with the ball...but then Kobe punked him out.
The point is that you could see he and Tins have that eye-contact and awareness.
The other was a whip pass to a cutting Sarunas that was tipped out (IIRC, or was it just a TO). They missed the play that time, but it was a killer read between two guys. Strong pass by JO, the kind of stuff you want to see between a PG and JO in the post. Later in the game they were successful on a less spectacular but similar play with JO feeding Saras for the score.
So maybe some things are coming together. I wouldn't read too much into the comeback as most of that featured Kobe on the bench, and I can't help but think that had some part in it.
And then there is the road-home thing. It's over now. The teams get tougher but at least they'll be at Conseco a lot more than they have been. I hope that helps. Wins at home over ORL and POR would be nice, it would make them 2-1 vs ORL on the year.
Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
As for a deal, I can agree that the team might be 10-20 games away from having to consider at least one pretty meaningful deal. They need to prove that these last 2 games were just the ends of a road trip. Seemed like there was some improvement when Foster became a starter. If they can make good on that at Conseco then it will be easy to blow off those last 2 losses.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Finally, you are tasting the 1st signs of the extraordinary Maccabi team that dominated Europe these past following years. Add to Saras & Baston Toronto's Anthony Parker as the prime defender and a 1on1 scorer when the shot clock winds down. Add also Nicola Vujcic - the best Center in Europe (had a tripple-double last week - VERY rare in 40 min Euroleague games) - plays a lot like Vlade Divac, and you can start to see what all the "Euro" fans (and I'm guessing - Larry Bird?) are raving all about.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
After the LA game, if I'm Bird I'm on the phone to Bryan Colangelo and to Shimon Mizrahi asking about Parker & Vujcic, and paying anything I've got except JO to make it happen.Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Reggie was there! He was rolling his eyes the whole game hehe. Why didnt they just use him for 8 seconds 8 pts...?
Comment
-
Re: LAKERS/PACERS POST GAME
Maccabi was a monster in Euro standards, mostly because these guys connected well and covered each others bads by team play. but if you judge them as separate talents I think only AP is cut to be a top NBA starter.Originally posted by NPFII
Saras & Baston could provide excellent support from the bench in NBA terms. Vujcic is a wonder, but he is fragile and can not hold as a starter for a full NBA season.
Other than that - regarding the game itself, I agree with those relating it to the schedule. I assume we will bounce back after some home games if everyone stays healthy. Also Jax is bound to find his shot sometime.Comment
Comment