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

Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

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

  • #61
    Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

    Tinsley as become the new whipping boy now that Jackson is gone. When and if Tinsley is ever gone, someone else will take his place as the new whipping boy. I wouldn't expect anything less from this group of whiners and blamers.

    Doesn't anyone realize that we lost or #2 and #3 scorers and with Quis out and Granger refusing to be more aggressive, that Tins is going to have to shoot more. Who else is going to score? Dun can't shoot for *****. Murphy looked like he didn't even want to be playing last night.

    Can't anyone see that it might take some time, at least a month or longer to even see what we have. Can anyone deny that we've played better since the trade? Does anyone really believe this the final product, after only a few weeks post trade?

    Another thing, It's absolutely fantastic that the Colts are World Champs! Doesn't change the fact that I've been a Pacer fan much longer. If people now ignore the Pacers, they were not real fans to begin with, screw them. I hope the Colts win 2 or 3 more SB's real soon. Blaming the Colts for the Pacers short comings is very petty and quite frankly idiotic. We are very lucky to have the Colts and players like Peyton, Marvin, Wayne, Saturday, Freeney etc... Peyton is almost like the Jordan of the NFL and will be included in most every discussion of the greatest players to ever play the game.
    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

      Maybe everybody missed this part of my post so I'll say it again. I don't care if Tinsley would have scored 100 points & threw out 33 assist, it still was the most selfish game I've seen played in years.

      It is NOT just the amount of shots he is taking, it is the time he is dominating the ball. When he is in the game there is maybe one or two passes that occur & they usually happen late in the clock when the person recieving the ball has time to either get up a jumper or pass it back.

      Nobody is disputing his ball handling ability, no one is doubting that other players aren't hitting their shots. What I am disputing is the fact that our offense is on a fast treadmill to nowhere when he is running the half court sets.

      Is it Rick's fault? Is it Jermaine's fault? Is it Jamaal's fault? Who knows but one thing is for sure, this offense is predictable, easily defended & frankly boring.

      I realize that many of you are fans of the Iverson, Marburry & Francis type point guards. I just am not.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

        Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
        http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/6445840It should also be noted that the game was decided within the first minute of action: The Warriors can only win when they turn a game into a track meet, while the Pacers need to slow the game down. So, then, Golden State began the proceedings with Harrington taking (and making) a quick triple. On Indiana's first possession, however, Tinsley unleashed a quick jumper that was antithetical to Carlisle's game plan.
        What Tinsley should have done was work the ball until everybody got a touch and the Warriors had to play defense for at least 20 seconds. Instead, he immediately got caught up in exactly the kind of tempo that Golden State sought to establish.
        On the Warriors' return trip, Harrington took (and made) an 18-foot jumper. The second time the Pacers moved the ball into the attack zone, Tinsley took (and missed) another hasty shot. (Overall, Tinsley put up six abominable shots.)
        And the Warriors ran away with the game. For one game, the Warriors certainly came out miles ahead ? but there was never any doubt that the short-term advantage would be theirs. The particulars of this deal can't be fully evaluated until the Pacers can ditch Tinsley and come up with a real point guard.
        Wow....that's a pretty good analysis. That 1st half of the 1st QTR really set the tone for the rest of the game. Sounds like Nellie read our posts about Mel-Mel the abuser and his quick "you take a quick shot....I will take an even quicker shot" mentality.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Ever since the loss in Detroit...Tinsley has averaged 16 FGA a game ( 14 FGA if we don't count his 24 FGA yesterday ) where we ended up winning 3 out of 5 games.

          Don't misread this as a "Tinsley took alot of shots in the previous games and no one complained about him then...why complain now" question...and I guess this question is more to the rest of the group that posted concerns about Tinsley becoming Jamaal Iverson....but what has been the difference with this loss...where he dominated the ball, took 24 FGA and dished out 10 Assists....and the previous 4 games where he averaged 8 Assists ( other then the additional 8 FGA he took )?

          Was Tinsley simply not looking for someone else other then JONeal to pass the ball to ( or was no one else simply open )?

          Did he lose confidence in Murphy and Dunleavy who have been shooting poorly lately?

          or

          Is the lack of ball-movement a result of Tinsley dominating the ball and simply going with option A ( look for JONeal ) and option B ( if JONeal isn't open...take a shot )?
          OR, Is he having to shoot more (many times to beat a shot clock) because there is no movement on offense? We have a lot of set shooters now, maybe they are standing at the 3 pt line too much.

          [/QUOTE]
          One more coincidence.....and I think this is something important to note.....but Tinsley's increased role in the offense ( basically taking 3 to 5 more FGA a game above his average 11 FGA and becoming a 1st/2nd scoring option ) not only corresponds with Murphy's recent nose injury ( and therefore his decreased role on offense where he is averaging about 4 FGA over the last 5 games )...but with Marquis being out of the lineup.

          I really wonder hope that Marquis comes back soon.....cuz I liked what we saw from the team when we weren't forced to play BOTH Tinsley and Armstrong on the floor at the same time.[/QUOTE]

          Bingo.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

            If Tinsley is dominating the ball, it's because nobody else on the team can dribble. Well, other than Daniels. And we know he's been injured.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

              Originally posted by PacerMan View Post
              OR, Is he having to shoot more (many times to beat a shot clock) because there is no movement on offense? We have a lot of set shooters now, maybe they are standing at the 3 pt line too much.
              That's the question....why hasn't there as much movement among the players?

              More importantly...when did this start happening?

              We have played only 9 games since the trade....the 1st game without the new players....and the 3rd one ...without Tinsley. That would leave about 7 games to look at.

              For those that have the games TIVOd or taped....can someone figure out when this happened?

              My guess is that the ball-movement stopped happening...for one reason or another....once Marquis got injured...and progressively worse as Murphy got injured. I get the sense that Marquis ( either directly or indirectly ) has something to do with this.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                Dunleavy made 4 shots last night and Jamaal assisted 3 of them. He missed 11 shots. How many of those came from Jamaal?

                10 assists last night:

                3 to Dunleavy
                3 to Granger
                2 to JO
                1 to Armstrong
                1 to Murphy

                Again, I stopped taking stats by the Memphis game because my point was made, but if you want to talk stats let's do it.


                How many of Jamaal's assists came in the 1st quarter? 1.

                Who was it to? Jermaine O'Neal.

                When did it occur? 5:46 remaining in the 1st quarter.

                What was Golden State's lead after the 1st quarter? 16.

                How many did we lose by? 15.


                My point was to address the 1st quarter, which has been giving the Pacers problems all season long, and it's the reason we lost last night.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                  To those ripping Tinsley's selfishness, you have to ask:

                  Why does the coach continue to allow it to happen?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                    Just to point out the obvious.....and so that we don't place all of the blame on Tinsley's shoulders.....when you look at the "Hustle Board" on the Post-Game Analysis on Pacers.com:

                    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/insider_070205.html

                    Points in the Paint: Pacers 36, Warriors 34
                    Fast-break points: Pacers 22, Warriors 17
                    2nd-chance points: Pacers 8, Warriors 10
                    Points off turnovers: Pacers 25, Warriors 19
                    Starters scoring: Pacers 76, Warriors 98
                    Bench scoring: Pacers 22, Warriors 15
                    If we actually had some more efficient offensive production from our starters ( most notably from Tinsley, Dunleavy and Murphy ) and Murphy/Foster rebounded better ( I didn't even notice that Foster played only 13 minutes )...we could have gotten closer. I am sure that the real reason we lost falls somewhere between Tinsley taking less shots then normal and the team...as a whole...actually hitting some shots when the ball is passed to them......but when we can't rebound or score....its harder for us to pull out a win....especially against a high-octane offense like the Warriors.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                      ...so "rebounding" isnt good enough for the hustle board?

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                        Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                        My point was to address the 1st quarter, which has been giving the Pacers problems all season long, and it's the reason we lost last night.
                        Before you even brought it up....I emailed Bruno about this just a few minutes ago...hopefully he can answer it.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          ...so "rebounding" isnt good enough for the hustle board?
                          I guess.....I have no clue why the Pacers Website doesn't include this stat in the "Hustle Board"...I figure it was important as well

                          FIXED:

                          Points in the Paint: Pacers 36, Warriors 34
                          Fast-break points: Pacers 22, Warriors 17
                          2nd-chance points: Pacers 8, Warriors 10
                          Points off turnovers: Pacers 25, Warriors 19
                          Starters scoring: Pacers 76, Warriors 98
                          Bench scoring: Pacers 22, Warriors 15
                          Rebounding: Pacers 42, Warriors 57

                          The key difference was in Defensive Rebounds....they had 16 more then we had.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                            Your rebound numbers are excluding "team" rebounds. We were really only outrebounded by five.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                              My "odd thoughts" since I just skimmed two pages in this thread:

                              DunDUn needs glasses. He has good form and height to his shot but they were all off line, just a bit, unless he was further out from the rim. I remember they discovered this about George McGinnis when he went thru a horrid shooting slump (toward the end of his career IIRC). I'm only half kidding about his need for glasses.

                              JT was really really trying to stuff his stats toward the end of the game IMPO.

                              As much as I loved DA's block, did you notice what he did immediately after? He yelled at Marshall (?) and then showed him how to block out his man on a jump ball. DA had to make that great play because someone had failed to box out on the jump ball down at our end. He will make US a great assistant someday.

                              All you Colt fans that took up the normally available parking places...I hope y'all have the sniffles today.

                              Tins gets the fastest plane outta here IMO.
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Odd thoughts from the Warriors game....

                                Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                                Tinsley as become the new whipping boy now that Jackson is gone. When and if Tinsley is ever gone, someone else will take his place as the new whipping boy. I wouldn't expect anything less from this group of whiners and blamers.
                                Having fans with the "whipping boy" mentality does not disguise the fact that Tinsley's played poorly all season. People who aren't fans of the Pacers have no problem seeing that; I'm not sure why some of us do or why we're making up excuses.

                                Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                                Doesn't anyone realize that we lost or #2 and #3 scorers and with Quis out and Granger refusing to be more aggressive, that Tins is going to have to shoot more. Who else is going to score? Dun can't shoot for *****. Murphy looked like he didn't even want to be playing last night.

                                I fail to see how this is different from 2004 or 2005. We had our top options out then, yet we had great ball movement from all of our players without them needing to be more aggressive.

                                It's not that Danny is refusing to be aggressive, unless you think he should be stealing the ball from Tinsley. We're not getting the ball distribution that we've had in the past from Tinsley. Period.

                                And I wouldn't blame Dunleavy or Troy for their low shooting %s. EVEN Jermaine has had an extremely low shooting % as of late, and it's because Jamaal has been missing passes at the elbow and he's been forcing the ball down into Jermaine and forcing him to make the play, rather than relying on good movement and waiting for Jermaine to get good position.


                                Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                                Can't anyone see that it might take some time, at least a month or longer to even see what we have. Can anyone deny that we've played better since the trade? Does anyone really believe this the final product, after only a few weeks post trade?
                                That would be an issue if it was consistent with the rest of the team, but it isn't. Darrell Armstrong has easily gotten the ball to move despite playing with 2 and sometimes 3 new players. It's just Tinsley.

                                And regardless of the trade we still have some core issues that revolve around ball movement. We had to make an adjustment to our starting lineup at the beginning of the year because one of our wing players wasn't fitting in, while the other one had an extremely poor FG%. Then we make the adjustment, a new wing player complains about his role in the offense and states that he'll take it upon himself to score. He doesn't work out, and now we have 2 new wing players with the exact same problem. Yet when he have an alternate starting PG, our offense clicks and our wing players have good games.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X