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

Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

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

    Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

    I agree with almost everything in his analysis of the trade. The quote from Al is in the second article out of the Bay Area

    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...ter_vecsey.htm

    January 19, 2007 -- SO what if the Suns, who previously won 15 games in a row, now have won 11 games in succession?
    So what if Chris Web ber (17 minutes, two points, five rebounds, three assists) made his Pistons debut Wednesday a Palace poop against Deron Williams and the Jazz?

    So what if the Ron Artest Welcome Wagon returns to Auburn Hills tomorrow night for the first time since that lovely "Audience Involvement Night" of a couple Novembers ago?

    Today's tome is dutifully dedicated to a pair of posses who began play last night combining to be merrily mediocre.

    Tuesday's trade of four Warriors for four Pacers was all about dumping toxic Stephen Jackson and catering to the styles of two coaches. Well, maybe not all about, but that pretty much sums up its motivation.

    So possessed were the Pacers to junk Jackson in hopes of helping restore law and order on and off the court, and, consequently, become more appealing to the community, they sacrificed Al Harrington and assumed roughly $30 million in additional contract obligation over the next four seasons belonging to Troy Murphy and Mike Dunleavy.

    That's how badly CEO Donnie Walsh and president Larry Bird wanted Jackson deported. Yes, his remaining $24M debt (this season plus three more) could've been bought out, but management didn't feel the assem bly of talent was good enough, big enough or tough enough to get any where worthwhile in the playoffs.

    At the same time, by tweezing Rick Carlisle's unremittingly irri tating ingrown hair, Walsh and Bird have removed any excuse their coach might have for a job undone. His structured sys tem has turned off many a core player over 31/2 seasons, including Jackson and Har rington. Swapping their ath leticism and spontaneous combustion, both positive and negative, for improved complementary pieces to Jermaine O'Neal - consulted on the deal prior to it going down, according to a source - means Carlisle got what he wanted, more coachable, more meticulous, deeper thinkers.

    When healthy, Murphy averaged double figures in rebounds and points two straight seasons. Due to assorted injuries and issues, the deliberate 6-foot-10 forward hasn't been nearly as effective in far fewer minutes.

    Murphy isn't the only one who didn't measure up to coach Don Nelson's quirky qualifications that almost exclusively rely on portable-positioned players who flaunt an agile offense and fast-moving feet; defensive discipline is usually introduced by his successor after a quick playoff expulsion or two, or, worse yet, no crashing of the post-tournament party.

    "I doubt Kareem Abdul-Jabbar could've played for Nellie," an East Coast team executive mocked.

    At any rate, Nelson dogged Dunleavy from day one, so much so that the media and the fans picked up the lame chant, booed him so lustily in Oaktown, the community named him an honorary Raider.

    Adonal Foyle also became an immediate outcast as soon as Nelson appeared, prompting early discussions of a buyout of the nearly $19M left on his two-year guarantee after this season. Furthermore, Derek Fisher was traded before the season even began.

    All of the above - Jason Richardson, too - had been signed to large, long-term contracts by VP Chris Mullin before Nelson arrived. Three of those players have been traded. Nelson also had no use for Ike Diogu, the No. 9 pick of the 2005 draft, so he became extraneous as well.

    No doubt Foyle will be next to go, and the chronically hurting Richardson (or Jackson) is bound to be dealt before the Feb. 22 deadline or some time this summer.

    Clearly, Mullin is banking his career as a Warriors executive on Nelson's master mind. He's subtracting and adding players according to his coach's specifications, just as Walsh and Bird have appeased Carlisle until further notice.

    By the way, the report out of who knows where by who knows who that the Pacers are talking to the Clippers about re-routing Dunleavy (for Corey Maggette) to play for his father is completely bogus.

    I talked to Walsh and Mike Dunleavy, the coach. They both assure me there is nothing to the story. In fact, the father says his son is extremely excited at the prospects of playing off a certified All-Star post player for the first time as a pro. At 6-9, Michael Jr. is an excellent entry passer and a better than average spot-up shooter. Clearly, O'Neal, Dunleavy and Murphy should prosper feeding off each other.

    Meanwhile, the Warriors have the ignominy of the league's most dysfunctional and defensively deficient (106.8 ppg allowed) district. The Nelson household has lost four of its last five games and is just 12-18 after foolin' the folks with a 7-3 getaway.

    "We saw a deal that was going to make us better and we went ahead and did it," Mullin said.

    Let's just say the bar, as previously Mullin-manufactured, wasn't set too high.

    As for the Pacers, they accomplished exactly what they set out to do: They ditched Jackson, who, by the way, instantly reloaded when he heard he was off to Oakland.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Vescey's Friday column

    Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but it seems Al is blaming JO for the slow down ball. We are remember JO tirade in the coaches office after the first Boston game.

    http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...printstory.jsp


    Harrington is eager to play Nellie Ball
    NEW WARRIOR HAPPY TO LEAVE PACERS' SLOWDOWN STYLE BEHIND
    By Geoff Lepper
    MediaNews

    Warriors executive vice president Chris Mullin has no one to blame but himself if someone makes off with his H-O-R-S-E crown. After two years of constant losses, Al Harrington is looking to knock off the champ.

    ``Now I'm ready for him,'' said Harrington, who lost plenty of cash to Mullin in shooting contests when the two were teammates on the Indiana Pacers in 1998-2000. ``I never could win, but I finally feel like I'm a good enough shooter that I can probably get some of that money out of his pocket.''

    Harrington had plenty of reason to joke around Thursday. After being denied a chance to play for his first choice because Mullin and the Atlanta Hawks couldn't come to an agreement on a sign-and-trade deal last summer, Harrington and teammates Stephen Jackson, Sarunas Jasikevicius and Josh Powell were traded from the Indiana Pacers to the Warriors for Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Ike Diogu and Keith McLeod on Wednesday.

    ``Obviously, when I signed with Indiana, I thought I was going to be there for a while. I wasn't going anywhere,'' said Harrington, who signed a four-year, $35.3 million contract to complete his sign-and-trade deal from Atlanta to Indiana. ``But Mully kept pursuing it and finally got it done.''

    Neither Harrington nor Jackson was a fan of Pacers Coach Rick Carlisle's slowdown style, which became more pronounced after an early season attempt to run more often.

    ``I thought (the faster tempo) was pretty good for us, but Jermaine (O'Neal) wasn't able to touch the ball as many times as we needed for us to win basketball games,'' Harrington said. ``We had to slow it down just a little bit so we could get him his touches. Once we did that, it kind of affected everybody. It's a tough way to play, especially when you have guys that are talented enough that can go out and create, make the game fun, just get things done out there.''

    It's hardly a surprise, therefore, to learn that Harrington is excited to play Nellie Ball.

    ``Definitely,'' Harrington said. ``The only thing is that they don't play up-tempo, they play fast-forward. I'm about to go in there and work out now so I can keep up.''

    Jackson was suspended for one game in December after making remarks to Carlisle that the coach deemed ``inappropriate and detrimental.'' But Jackson, 28, said he would have no problem playing for Don Nelson, even though the veteran coach has spared few feelings this season and pulls players almost on a whim.

    ``The situation with me and Coach Carlisle was that I felt there was more that could have been done to win games. (We) gave up sometimes too early,'' Jackson said. ``It was just me being a competitor and knowing I could do more to help my team win games, (but) I felt I wasn't put in those positions. I think me and Coach (Nelson) will be great, because he's been around a long time. He's seen guys like me come and go. He knows the relationship I need to have, and I know the respect I need to give him and I'm willing to do that.''

    For his part, Harrington is willing and happy to get back to the low block. The 6-foot-9 forward abandoned that post when he returned to the Pacers after two seasons in Atlanta, ceding the space to O'Neal and becoming an efficient three-point shooter (45.8 percent, fourth-best in the NBA).

    ``Here, playing (power forward) is perfect,'' Harrington said. ``I don't feel like anyone can guard me one-on-one. I will get double-teamed and be able to free up my teammates.''

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

      All I know is that Jermaine is probably happy basketball-wise that this trade happened. Finally we're building around our franchise guy. How come we never thought of getting guys who can feed him in the post well before? Now we have Dunleavy, Daniels, and Tinsley.

      I really like this trade.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Vescey's Friday column

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but it seems Al is blaming JO for the slow down ball. We are remember JO tirade in the coaches office after the first Boston game.

        ``The situation with me and Coach Carlisle was that I felt there was more that could have been done to win games. (We) gave up sometimes too early,'' Jackson said. ``It was just me being a competitor and knowing I could do more to help my team win games, '
        #1 It does seem JO isn't as vocal about losing his friend as I might expect.

        #2 The Jackson quote is great. Maybe if Stephen had got back on defense instead of gripping about calls they could have won more games.
        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

          It was just me being a competitor and knowing I could do more to help my team win games
          Has there been another player LESS likely to take the RIGHT shot, make the RIGHT pass, than our dearly departed SG? None I can think of since Jonathan was playing.

          One of the biggest difficulties with him is the tremendous gap between

          1)what he think he knows and how good he thinks he is
          2) what he actually knows and how good he actually is

          There were basketball IQ and ego issues and now those are somebody else's problem.
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

            It does sound like Al didn't like the preferential treatment that JO got here.

            Sounds like Al wanted to be the franchise player.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

              Originally posted by pacertom View Post
              Has there been another player LESS likely to take the RIGHT shot, make the RIGHT pass, than our dearly departed SG? None I can think of since Jonathan was playing.

              One of the biggest difficulties with him is the tremendous gap between

              1)what he think he knows and how good he thinks he is
              2) what he actually knows and how good he actually is

              There were basketball IQ and ego issues and now those are somebody else's problem.
              Perfectly stated. Great post!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                MY thoughts, who cares? Jack and Al are gone now. Who cares who blames who and what. I am the one who lives in Oakland, where they will be playing. I am happy with the trade for both sides, and would love to just move on from the past.

                Go Pacers!
                Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                  Originally posted by Gyron View Post
                  It does sound like Al didn't like the preferential treatment that JO got here.

                  Sounds like Al wanted to be the franchise player.
                  Sounds a lot to me like a certain other "SF" who we jettisoned off to the west coast. How has that worked out so far?

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                    Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                    All I know is that Jermaine is probably happy basketball-wise that this trade happened. Finally we're building around our franchise guy. How come we never thought of getting guys who can feed him in the post well before? Now we have Dunleavy, Daniels, and Tinsley.

                    I really like this trade.
                    R U kidding me, we have been building around him for 6 years, even when Reggie was still around and much more capable of leading this team.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                      Originally posted by Gyron View Post
                      It does sound like Al didn't like the preferential treatment that JO got here.

                      Sounds like Al wanted to be the franchise player.
                      And he will be continually disappointed that he never will be.
                      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                        Good luck AL and Jack,you'll need it!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                          I didn't need a Harrington quote to tell me this:


                          ``I thought (the faster tempo) was pretty good for us, but Jermaine (O'Neal) wasn't able to touch the ball as many times as we needed for us to win basketball games,'' Harrington said. ``We had to slow it down just a little bit so we could get him his touches. Once we did that, it kind of affected everybody. It's a tough way to play, especially when you have guys that are talented enough that can go out and create, make the game fun, just get things done out there.''

                          If we're going to play that way then JO has to come thru and the other players have to play their role and do their part regardless of their own games and desires... or beliefs. JO is not sacrificing his own game whether it makes those around him better or not. Whether that's right or wrong doesn't matter because TPTB have decided they either agree... or agree to appease him.

                          But when you try and force something so much, don't be surprised when other areas suffer because of it. It comes with the territory.

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                            At 6-9, Michael Jr. is an excellent entry passer
                            I'm just pretty excited to see a member of the national sports media write something about an entry pass. It's pretty unlifting to hear someone mention something nuanced about a player's game when most sportswriters can only differentiate between players as "Superstars", "All-Stars", "role players" or "scrubs"
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:
                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Vescey's column - is Al blaming JO for the slow paced offense

                              Originally posted by Al Harrington
                              ``I thought (the faster tempo) was pretty good for us, but Jermaine (O'Neal) wasn't able to touch the ball as many times as we needed for us to win basketball games,''
                              Help me understand. The way this is worded implies (and the record backed it up to a certain extent) that the team was unable to win if JO didn't get his touches.

                              How can you blame JO for the faster pace game not getting him the ball often enough? How can you give the other players in the faster pace game a pass when their inability to score when free-flowing was a major factor in JO being double-teamed or having his passing lanes blocked?

                              I know it is fashionable to blame JO, but if JO is the only offensive option even when the play concentrates on flowing around other areas of the court, our opponents only have to keep JO away from the ball. Period.

                              You can say you want to play fast-paced, free-flowing ball, but you have to be able to score by getting the ball quickly down court (not having to pass back to the PG every time), hitting mid-range jumpers (not settling for a bricked 3 and back on defense), and moving the ball faster than the defense can block the passing lane. If you can't do that, then shut up and play a more structured game.
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X