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

Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

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

    Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

    O'Neal's frustration boils over


    He is tired of Pacers playing like 'a very average team,' ponders his future

    by Mike Wells

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/701060438

    DALLAS -- The Indiana Pacers' inconsistency has started to take its toll on their franchise player.

    Forward Jermaine O'Neal spent about 20 minutes inside an empty locker room at the American Airlines Center late Thursday night venting about their 17-16 record.

    "We're a very average team right now," O'Neal said. "We're going to be average until we decide as players that we want to win and do the right things we're supposed to do to win. If we don't do it, we're going to mingle around .500, get in the playoffs and then be out."

    O'Neal's frustrations boiled over after the Pacers squandered an opportunity to end the Dallas Mavericks' 11-game winning streak Thursday. The Pacers played solid for the first three-plus quarters only to "self destruct" in the final few minutes.

    The constant inconsistency has O'Neal thinking about his future with the Pacers. O'Neal, who is averaging a team-high 19.3 points, 10.6 rebounds and 3.2 blocks per game, reiterated his comments made to The Star last summer about playing with the team beyond this season.

    "If I can't take this team to another level, I truthfully believe we should go our separate ways at the end of the season," said O'Neal, who added his first choice is to remain with the Pacers. "I'm saying in general, the bottom line is you play to win. If we don't have a system set to win a championship, if we don't have the crew to win a championship, then what are we doing?

    "I'm getting to the point, I'm in my 11th year, I don't want to play 82 games and then exit to watch somebody else pop champagne. . . . I'm tired of that. I want to compete for a championship. If we can't do it, that's a whole (different) story."

    When asked if he has taken his displeasure to CEO Donnie Walsh and team president Larry Bird, O'Neal said, "It's in the best interest of my team and the city not to comment about that. The bottom line is we win and lose as a team and everybody is responsible for it. The coaching staff all the way down to the players."

    Walsh, making one of his few road appearances, said he understands O'Neal's frustration.
    "I think he's played really well and if the time comes for (talking about O'Neal's future), then that will be the time. We'll see," Walsh said. "I don't like to respond to comments after a tough loss like that. We're going through a difficult part of the season. I'm frustrated, the coaches are frustrated on occasion and the team is frustrated."

    The Pacers, who overhauled their roster last summer, have beaten Detroit and Orlando, two of the top teams in the Eastern Conference, twice each this season. It's losses to Boston, Toronto, Seattle and Charlotte that have stopped any talk of them being an elite team in the East.
    Tonight, they are at Oklahoma City.

    The Pacers' longest losing streak is only three games. They have failed seven times to win three straight games.

    "We've proven we can go out and beat the best teams in the East. We've also gone out and proven we can lose to the worst teams in the East," O'Neal said. "What's the solution? I don't know what the solution is. It's frustrating."

    The Pacers' rotation has been just as inconsistent as their play on the court. Players are uncertain of their roles on the team. Talk about players having their own personal agenda has started to circulate around the locker room.

    "Before the season started, we met with each one of our players and told them what is to be expected of each one of them," Pacers coach Rick Carlisle said. "We coach them and try to do better. We don't always play great. The thing I'm encouraged about is our effort has been really good. We just have to cut down on mistakes."

    Call Star reporter Mike Wells at (317) 444-6053.

    Copyright 2006 IndyStar.com. All rights reserved
    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)
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

    And there's the first real warning sign. Can't blame him.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

      Originally posted by Putnam View Post
      The Pacers' rotation has been just as inconsistent as their play on the court. Players are uncertain of their roles on the team. Talk about players having their own personal agenda has started to circulate around the locker room.

      "Before the season started, we met with each one of our players and told them what is to be expected of each one of them," Pacers coach Rick Carlisle said. "We coach them and try to do better. We don't always play great. The thing I'm encouraged about is our effort has been really good. We just have to cut down on mistakes."
      If you want your team to win then the role of your players must be crystalclear IMO. This can not be understated. Sure, if say Quis is having a dream game and scores everything he shoots then lets him shoot, there should always be room for adapting in an individual game. Also I am not saying it must be set in stone how many plays a player get.

      However, it does mean that each player must know what's expected of them in the game and to do when certain situations occur. It also means that we need to get a decently stable rotation. Again, not set in stone, but understandable. And I think adjusting before the game starts to matchups is one of the main things here that creates problems instead of solving them.

      Offcourse, implementing a new system will create more turnovers, but if you constantly keep changing the players around you, so you can't consistantly develop chemistry not too mention that some of our players that play most minutes seem to be quite unsuited to a faster paced style.

      As with regards to certain players having agenda's of their own ... how many of us do not think that's mainly aimed at Jamaal?

      Regards,

      Mourning
      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

        Stupid Mike Wells, and stupid JO. Fool me once, fool me twice yada yada yada ...

        Why do these guys go to the friggin media instead of going to the their teammates and coaches with their problems?

        I said it last year when this whole Artest thing happened and JO said "him or me" to the media. And then he goes onto to say "if the franchise cant get it done next year, I want out" to the media. What kind of message does that say to his teammates? As dominate as I think JO has been playing this year, this is a shame that this has came out AGAIN! JO has shown time and time again, that he cant lead this team to a championship anyway with comments like this to the media ... starting public drama, like a little kid running to mommy and tattle tailing.

        Part of what he said has to fall back on himself (as the team leader).

        ONCE AGAIN, like I said last year, would REGGIE have said something like this to the media? Hell no! He would have went to his teammates and coaches and expressed what he thought as the team leader!

        With JO playing out of this world right now, I hope they do trade him even though I say this with a heavy Pacer heart.

        GET GARNETT NOW ... while we still have a chance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

          You think JO didn't go with this to the team, the staff or the front office? I think he has.
          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
            You think JO didn't go with this to the team, the staff or the front office? I think he has.
            Even if he did, so what. What im saying is DONT GO spout of at the mouth to the media. You think his teammates will respect him as a team leader anymore. NO WAY!!!

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

              Originally posted by Mourning View Post
              If you want your team to win then the role of your players must be crystalclear IMO. This can not be understated. Sure, if say Quis is having a dream game and scores everything he shoots then lets him shoot, there should always be room for adapting in an individual game. Also I am not saying it must be set in stone how many plays a player get.

              However, it does mean that each player must know what's expected of them in the game and to do when certain situations occur. It also means that we need to get a decently stable rotation. Again, not set in stone, but understandable. And I think adjusting before the game starts to matchups is one of the main things here that creates problems instead of solving them.

              As with regards to certain players having agenda's of their own ... how many of us do not think that's mainly aimed at Jamaal?

              Regards,

              Mourning

              I didn't think of Jamaal at all, why do you think that? I think if you mean getting into one on one macho contest against opposing point guards, thats immaturity. I thought of Jackson, he still is lax on D if he doesn't get to touch the ball every other times down, and I think if he gets taken out at the end he's all about me. Jax would be so much happier being a go to guy on a bad team, imo.

              As far as rotation. Yep Carlise shoots himself in the foot everytime with this, but I can not blame him, you want to shake it up when guys start to not give effort, so two things you have to be clear on roles, but guys have to be willing to do fill them with vigor. You have to have a coach who challenges these guys mentally, challenge their manhood to get them to fill the roles or have players (Foster) who readily understand what they do and when to do it. I go back to the 2000 team. DD was the enforcer, didn't need a shot. Rik was your low post threat, Mark Jax a pure PG, Mullin 3 point specialist, Reggie... well be Reggie, Jalen was the one guy on that team that I imagine had to be coddled by teammates and coaches, but it was easy, he was the only one and he really was just a role player imo, a scorer.

              In a way, its like training a dog. I think most dogs want to do what you ask them because they want to be part of the "pack", but if you don't clearly and very very simply break it down, they don't know what to do.

              Carlise needs to really just completely settle into an 8 man rotation, but the problem is you have immature players who won't bring it consistently and sacrifice for the good of the whole, see Detroit for the best example of this.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                I'd like to read between the lines here, if I may.

                Originally posted by Star

                Forward Jermaine O'Neal spent about 20 minutes inside an empty locker room at the American Airlines Center late Thursday night venting about their 17-16 record.
                No. If the locker room was empty, no one would know what O'Neal said or thought. Mike Wells was in the locker room with him. There are those who dislike Mike Wells, and there's no denying that he dislikes the Pacers. But there is a lot to dislike, and I believe Mike has reported this honestly.

                Originally posted by Star
                "We're a very average team right now," O'Neal said. "We're going to be average until we decide as players that we want to win and do the right things we're supposed to do to win. If we don't do it, we're going to mingle around .500, get in the playoffs and then be out."
                This "collective responsibility" attitude has got to stop. Finger-pointing will raise tempers and drive things to a crisis, but it has got to happen. It doesn't have to happen in the newspaper, of course.

                Originally posted by Star
                O'Neal's frustrations boiled over after the Pacers squandered an opportunity to end the Dallas Mavericks' 11-game winning streak Thursday. The Pacers played solid for the first three-plus quarters only to "self destruct" in the final few minutes.
                JO thought the Pacers should have won the game. If you are one of the guys who posted after the game, saying, "It was the Mavs. What do you expect?" then JO disagrees with your assessment. He played a great game, Nowitzki was off, and the Pacers lead most of the game. The Pacers could, should and would have won that game, if the guard play hadn't fallen apart in the last 5 minutes.

                Originally posted by Star
                "If I can't take this team to another level, I truthfully believe we should go our separate ways at the end of the season," said O'Neal, who added his first choice is to remain with the Pacers.
                Here I think Mike Wells is vague. O'Neal said this over the summer. Did he say it again Thursday night, or is Wells digging up the old quote?

                Either way, Jermaine is on honorable ground here.

                Originally posted by Star
                "I'm getting to the point, I'm in my 11th year, I don't want to play 82 games and then exit to watch somebody else pop champagne. . . . I'm tired of that. I want to compete for a championship. If we can't do it, that's a whole (different) story."
                Me, too, JO. I'm in my 47th year, and I feel just the same way.


                Originally posted by Star
                O'Neal said, "The bottom line is we win and lose as a team and everybody is responsible for it. The coaching staff all the way down to the players."
                Everybody shares responsibility. But not equally. I hate reading over and over, "We didn't execute. We've got to do better. We've got off to a slow start." I want people to say, "Tinsley took too many shots." And if, as Jay contends, Tinsley took those shots because Carlisle told him to, then I want them to say, "Carlisle is calling plays badly." And if Carlisle is calling those plays because the players won't execute any better alternative scheme, then I want Carlisle to say, "What the hell else am I supposed to call, when Harrington and Jackson are standing flat foot 30 feet from the basket with a man in front of them, and JO is double teamed and Tinsley is the only person with a shot?" I don't know where it will end, but the air will never be cleared as long as it is "We."

                Originally posted by Star
                The Pacers, who overhauled their roster last summer...
                No they didn't. They tweaked the roster. We knew at the start of th season they hadn't done enough, and it is becoming clearer that the off-season tweaking accomplished nothing but a considerable reduction in the payroll.

                We aren't faster, and we aren't better. And we aren't happier.



                Originally posted by Star
                Talk about players having their own personal agenda has started to circulate around the locker room.
                Hmmm.
                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

                • #9
                  Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                  Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                  There are those who dislike Mike Wells, and there's no denying that he dislikes the Pacers.
                  Huh?

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                    Actually, I don't think Jermaine has really said much of anything to the media other than voicing his own opinion regarding the consistency of the team.

                    Jermaine said nothing about the players who are reportedly pursuing their own agendas. Note that nothing dealing with that statement is in quotes.

                    If Jermaine really wanted to air their dirty laundry, he could have mentioned names. He didn't.

                    The only thing to possibly be worried about is that our best player might do everything he is capable of doing to force a trade following this season. That might result in another fire sale and possibly not getting equal value in return.

                    But let's look at Jermaine himself. 19.3/10.6/3.2. His offensive numbers are not a whole lot different than what he has produced when healthy. But the real difference in his game this season seems to be as a defender and shot-blocker.

                    But why is that? It's not like he has undergone some sort of epiphany and has suddenly been divinely blessed with additional defensive skills. On the contrary... he has just finally decided that he will put out a full effort on the defensive end.

                    On the one hand, that's a great thing. To dedicate one's self to truly become a complete player. On the other hand, it doesn't speak well for the effort and his role as a leader that he has played in his previous seasons.

                    I don't think anyone would argue that Jermaine has got to become a better leader. I've been mixed on whether he should go or stay, but I would have to admit that he is giving everything he's got right now. But a leader makes those around him better, and he finds ways, either through example, or by chewing butt if necessary, to make those around him better. A true leader typically has teammates that don't want to let him down... they give effort and they "play the right way" (because the leader demands it).

                    Is it possble that Jermaine's teammates, either because of his own past effort, or even a lack of personal respect for him, have shut him out as much sa they seem to have shut out Rick?

                    Jermaine's interview was either meant as a whining tirade or it was an attempt to motivate his teammates. I guess we will see which it was over the course of the next few weeks.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      I didn't think of Jamaal at all, why do you think that? I think if you mean getting into one on one macho contest against opposing point guards, thats immaturity.
                      Ok, let's see...

                      "Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, clearly frustrated by the Pacers' up-and-down play in a 17-16 start, went on to reveal that he badly wants to stay a Pacer, telling Reggie Miller recently that he doesn't want to leave until he wins the championship that eluded Miller's Pacers, but O'Neal also disclosed that he has an agreement with management to "talk at the end of the season" and determine if a change is best for both parties.

                      O'Neal, on this scorecard, looks like the least of Indiana's problems, playing the best defense of his life. Inconsistent play at the point, as referenced in Box 1, remains the Pacers' foremost trouble spot. Yet O'Neal acknowledges that he's "going to take the blame" for any struggles and "rightfully so."

                      link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...dime-070106-07
                      (right block of the page where there's a part about JO and his comments)

                      here's the box 1 on the same page that he refers to in the above part:

                      "We've had a lot of games this year where we've controlled the game all the way up until the fourth and then lose our damn mind. Why? ... We get up 10 points and we just go ballistic. Sit down and get some tape. Every time we hit a 10-point margin, we go ballistic. I can't understand it for the life of me."

                      Jamaal Tinsley's decision-making, I'd say, has something to do with it"


                      And "immaturity"? Why immaturity? Jamaal has been in the league since 2001, he's in his fith year now, and is 28 (almost 29) years old. I don't accept that. IF he's still iommature now then he's a major problem when he's starting for us.

                      It's not only the one-on-one crap, it's the number of shots he has taken too:

                      "Tinsley has shot 37-of-116 (.319) from the field in the last eight"

                      link: http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/preview_070106.html

                      That's an average of 14.5 shots per game, while he's probably the worst shooter on our starting squad he still manages to take the third most shots on the team. He's easily taken the second most shots in the last 8 games, Al's not close.

                      I think his 0-9 shooting, 18 shots in total for the game (one more then Nowitzky and equal to the number of shots our number one option, JO, took) against the Mavericks, his one-on-one BS and his bad decision-making and turnovers cost us the game in the 4th. Did I mention his direct opponent shot 8-10 (80%!!!) and got 24 points in total. And howabout against the Bobcats when Tins direct opponent, Raymond Felton, had 19 (!!!) assists. A career high.

                      And then there's the high amount of TO's versus the average amount of assists, the bad decision-making (immaturity too?).

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                        So he has his own agenda, which was who you said you thought of with that comment, because JO said the Pacers implode after getting up by 10, JO is consulting Reggie about his future, he doesn't shoot a high percentage, and he has a bad assist to t/o ratio.

                        As far a immaturity, maybe there is another word for it, its the response when you get cut off in traffic and want to ride the guys bumper in front of you, its feeling disrespected and then trying to get the person back to let them know you aren't their beotch. When in Tinsleys case he needs to make the right play whether his pride is hurt or not.

                        Two things, 1.) where does JT rank in for PGs with the Assist to T/O. 2.) what is his agenda, specifically?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                          Wait, the Assist to T/O ratio is 32 in the league for all players who have qualified. 31 for all guards, Nba.COM doesn't allow to sort, just PGs. He's sandwiched right between Tony Parker, Jarrett Jack, and Luke Ridnour and Mike Bibby.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                            Jamaal Tinsley's decision-making, I'd say, has something to do with it"[/b]
                            Are you suggesting that this is a quote from O'neal, because the article is not written this way. This seems to be Stein's remarks.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Star} O'Neal's Fustration Boils Over

                              Originally posted by Speed View Post
                              Wait, the Assist to T/O ratio is 32 in the league for all players who have qualified. 31 for all guards, Nba.COM doesn't allow to sort, just PGs. He's sandwiched right between Tony Parker, Jarrett Jack, and Luke Ridnour and Mike Bibby.
                              Don't throw incorrect numbers out here, there's enough nonsense floating around without having to add to it with wrong data.



                              Tins is 16th in Ast/game of all guards.
                              Tins is 10th in Ast/48 min

                              When cleaned (i.e. take out everone with less then 150 Ast) then he is 19th
                              he's 31st in Turnovers/game
                              he's 12th in total Ast dished out

                              DA (with 52 total Ast) is 3.08 and Sara (98) is 1.88
                              Parker (Tony) 2.00
                              Del West 2.17
                              TJ Ford 2.37
                              Maurice Williamsn 2.26

                              As for 0 for 9 in the second half (last Q) against the Mavs: I suggest you watch some tape, I know a ball bouncing on the rim 5 times and out is a miss, but outside of "results" (0-9) you may want to judge by looking at "Bad" or Good" shots and if you are saying he "forced" the issue, then please tell me who was ready to take the ball?

                              Finally; All plays in the last Q were called by Rick, including an out of bounds by Jax which Granger completely missed the catch, and Al missing the cathing of 2 passes which were not difficult to catch.

                              I'm not saying Tins played well, au contraire, but he doesn't deserve the stick he's getting here and is one of the last to have his own agenda, or it must be that he wants to play 82 games.

                              Look at how Al is playing, and Jax jawing at Rick and tell me more.

                              Why did Sara play so little ? in 1 minute and 13 seconds he was -4 and burned 3 times on defense.

                              Yes Tins' shooting was horrible (unlucky?) in the 4th, but if he was 0-9 and his total is 6-18 he was 6-9 until then, did you consider that as well ?
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                              Comment

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