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

I have a theory... and some won't like it...

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

  • #16
    Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

    Bball, wasn't it you who was so sure that Jermaine was going to be traded with Tinsley to the T-Wolves for Garnett right after we signed Sarunas in 05?

    Jermaine isn't going anywhere. Predict all you want.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

      Originally posted by Isaac View Post
      Bball, wasn't it you who was so sure that Jermaine was going to be traded with Tinsley to the T-Wolves for Garnett right after we signed Sarunas in 05?

      Jermaine isn't going anywhere. Predict all you want.
      I was rooting for the possibility because I thought both players could use a change of scenery but I wasn't predicting it.

      -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


      • #18
        Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

        Ok, two things.

        1. People, this is Bball's opinion. This is a message board. We are all entitled to opinions & yes we are entitled to being told our opinions are wrong, garbage, whatever.

        So I think it is totally wrong to be asking Bball why he is making a post about his opinion. It is totally right to tell him his opinion is wrong, but let's not stifle the creative process here please.

        2. Of course I happen to agree with Bball on this.

        He's taking the heat but I'm the one who lost his mind after that 8th game meeting. Nothing mythical about it. It's fact with two verified sources. Yes one was the hated evil Mike Wells but guess who was the other source? That's right J.O. himself verified that there was a "clearing of the air" meeting.

        Immediately after that we saw a return to slog ball. We saw Jeff Foster return & Danny be benched. We saw Al Harrington go from being energetic & inconsistant to being inconsistant.

        But some of us will only blame Rick Carlisle.

        Save your typing btw people because I'm not going to be changing my mind on this just like none of you will change yours.

        You can tell me all you want about slow starts, bad defense, etc., etc., etc.

        At the end of the day I still believe what I believe & that is that Jermaine O'Neal at the first sign of trouble, eight games into the season, went storming into the office & demanded that the offense be re-structured to run through him.

        Now how does this play into Bballs post? Simple, all summer long the Pacer made moves so that we would have players who would thrive in an open court setting. Players that needed movement, not spacing, for thier games to work.

        That all went down after game 8. Then the next big trade occures & at first the offense was differant & the team was differant. But once they got to practice frequently & learn the plays we then saw a lot of spacing & little motion.

        But it's just Rick Carlisle I'm sure.

        Ok, some of the above was hyperbole on my part. I'm not saying which.


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

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

          We are going to be battling the luxury tax every year in the foreseeable future. That will be okay if we are winning and fans return to Conseco.

          But, I think it is also clear, if we don't win consistently, the Pacers attendance problems and corresponding financial issues will worsen, if anything.

          The financial distress on the team caused by mediocrity on the court will be the reason JO exits Indiana, if he ever does.

          To a large extent JO's future in Indiana depends on how well this team plays the rest of the season and, especially, in the playoffs. If we can't be a top tier team with JO, sooner rather than later, the team is going to want to move on and head in a different direction. So will JO.

          If things don't work out, it will be wrong to say this divorce was because Rick didn't use JO properly, or that JO didn't do everything he could to help this team. The trade will come because the Pacers and JO simply weren't collectively good enough on the court to get the job done.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

            Originally posted by sixthman View Post
            To a large extent JO's future in Indiana depends on how well this team plays the rest of the season and, especially, in the playoffs. If we can't be a top tier team with JO, sooner rather than later, the team is going to want to move on and head in a different direction. So will JO.

            If things don't work out, it will be wrong to say this divorce was because Rick didn't use JO properly, or that JO didn't do everything he could to help this team. The trade will come because the Pacers and JO simply weren't collectively good enough on the court to get the job done.
            Is QFT allowed here?

            The fact JO could walk is a risk, but what makes it a bigger risk is that he in no uncertain terms indicated that it might be time to for a move...particularly if he finds the team is not going to get a championship.

            ...and that leads to the major point.

            When we get bounced out of the playoffs pretty easily again, the writing will be on the wall. There are two primary reasons why the JO-era is going no where: 1) The team is poorly constructed, 2) The talent level is not what it used to be.

            I think both of these problems cannot be fixed with JO in an Indiana uniform...because he's not going to get it done by himself...and we need his trade value to rebuild.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

              Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
              Thats what it is. If the Boston game thing never happend, you think BBall wouldnt be trying to pull this crap again anyway. Just like you said, if the Boston thing didnt happen BBall would have found something else, so it doesnt really matter.

              He felt like this for like 2-3 years, this is not something that just came to him, he is just using the Boston thing as a excuse.

              Yes but, take Bball out of the equation and the game 8 blow up STILL HAPPEND.
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                The Cold Hard Fact is that Jermaine O'Neal is a Franchise player by salary structure ONLY.

                Leaders lead, they don't complain and they don't say maybe the team and I would be better off parted. Jermaine is looking for the best way out so that he still comes out of it smelling like a rose.

                No one has said on this thread that Jermaine lacks in skills, what he lacks is a clear undestanding of what sacrfices that he needs to personally make to make this a better "TEAM".

                I've read so many Jermaine Rah, Rah, your so great because you can score the ball posts it just reafirms my thoughts on how many of you rationally look at the pro game, especially how it is played here in Indianapolis. So many of you want to throw Rick Carlise under the bus, yet all he has done is win, and win against overwelming odds. Its not the coach people! The sooner that ALL of you Carlise bashers understand that the less moronic statements will be made.

                All Carlise has done is put a system into effect that maximises the talent on hand. He can't stop Jermanine from taking a bad shot or Tinsley from going into one of his one on one comas. These two players have the ability to step it up and winning one losing one, winning three losing three isn't getting it done.

                Players like Jeff Foster, Troy Murphy, Marquis Daniels and Mike Dunleavy are role playing parts to this bad soap opera. You can't blame them for missed shots at the end of games, more often or not Tinsley and O'Neal are taking.....Do you remember the last time Jermaine hit a game winner? Tinsley?

                When it comes right down to it look for Jermaine to hanve a different zip code this summer, with Tinsley right behind him. Regardless of if its Kevin Garnett, Loul Deng or Paul Pierce or even Greg Oden....O'Neal won't be the one leading us to an NBA championship.

                Thats a Fact, one that can't be disputed.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  he's not going to get it done by himself...and we need his trade value to rebuild.
                  Pretty much, yeah. Although I hope the Pacers magically find an alternative solution.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                    I think the current group of players would blend much better with KG. JO is about on the same level as KG, but likes the fire and fight that KG has. KG's tenaciousness is contagious. I know, he's never taken his team anywhere except for one season but, again, he hasn't been surrounded with the appropriate style of players and I think that we have that style.

                    KG has wanted to be away from the TWolves for quiet a while now and it may take JO and a throw in to get the job done but I think it would be a great move.
                    .

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                      Originally posted by odeez View Post
                      If you look at his game this year, I don't think you can complain too much.
                      To me it's a litmus test in fact. If you look at JO putting up Reggie caliber numbers, albeit in different categories than Reggie, and see that as "not stepping up" or not being an on-court leader, whatever, then I think it speaks volumes.

                      When a guy is trashed while dealing with injury or just struggling you might think 'hmm, that seems like a curious bias against that player". When it continues despite a drastic improvement in his game then you realize that it's not just curious. It gets a bit annoying at that point.


                      And "showcasing"? One of the weakest theories going. Charges and blocked shots, SPRINTING back to stop a transition score night after night...that's all about getting traded to another team? But if it's Tinsley then he's just phoning it in on a guaranteed contract.

                      It's a lose-lose if a fan simply has decided they will no longer support a player, whatever they do is a sign - play hard and it's showcasing, play weak and you don't care and need to be shipped (ironically that requires being showcased which means playing hard).

                      I have ZERO problem with criticism of any player (I've criticized every player on the team at some point), but to me a SINCERE fan also recognizes when a player gets it going and is productive on court. Skewing even the good things to be signs of more bad casts a hard doubt on a person's sincerety as a fan.


                      And what did Reggie do in 97 that led the team? Or even 98? He didn't do a thing. Often in the 90's he jawed at refs, glared at Spike, pogo'd at center court, bowed after hitting a shot that didn't even win the game, struggled on defense, grabbed few rebounds, handed out few assists...and so on.

                      DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS, right? Well JO is a serious candidate for DPOY. I haven't seen if 82games has the charges taken numbers for THIS season yet, but I have little doubt that JO is leading the team by a wide margin (which he also did last year despite all the missed games). He's pulling down 1 or 2 per game, and blocking 3 shots a night too.

                      That's the dirty work, and as far as I can tell he's setting a tone night after night that if every player stepped up and matched would make the team a top contender and a defensive juggernaut.


                      And JO was right to speak up early on. They got a bit better after backing off the running game. Then they got better after swapping out Granger for Foster. Here's the first 4 sets of 9 games played, roughly falling around the 2 changes and then the team settling in.
                      4-5 (3 losses to non-playoff teams)
                      5-4 (1 loss to non-playoff team)
                      5-4 (0 losses to non-playoff teams)
                      6-3 (1 loss to non-playoff team)

                      Then 0-2 which resulted in the trading of 4 players, and one of those losses was OT vs Dallas, not some poor effort. The other a bad loss to non-playoff New Jersey.

                      Let's remember that the Pacers went 1-3 including blow-outs in Washington and then to BOSTON the night of JO's closed-door rant, as well as the defensive rebounding choke job in Chicago (which JO was partly to blame for). There were reasons to be frustrated.


                      Reality check - if Reggie Miller does the exact same thing it would be considered a sign of his passion to win and his leadership to demand a better style of play, even/especially if it included working him off screens more for shots (which was the centerpiece of the Pacers offense when he was the "leader").

                      A smart team plays off it's best player. That's a big reason why the Spurs play differently than the Suns do, yet both teams win games.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                        take a backseat to who?
                        to a style of play? wtf? why would he "Take a backseat" anywhere? he is a STAR player...would lebron james,wade,kobe,KG Take a back seat? WTF?
                        JO thinks if he can't get it done with this team then he needs to leave...maybe he wants to? maybe he KNOWS this team can't get it done? ok who cares lets trade JO to the magic for darko and ariza and start over.
                        "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                          Originally posted by Peck
                          That's right J.O. himself verified that there was a "clearing of the air" meeting.

                          Immediately after that we saw a return to slog ball.
                          Good. They needed the air cleared, they weren't playing good ball. JO wasn't the problem with up-tempo, he wasn't throwing the ball into the 3rd row, blowing 3 on 1 breaks that turned into layups the other way, and so on. Tins, Jack, and Al were struggling to run efficiently. Danny's awareness wasn't there yet either.

                          BTW, see the numbers above, slog ball = winning ball. Sorry you hate seeing a post-dominate offense, but it's not like Orlando used to run with Shaq or the Wolves even run with KG.

                          KG takes 22.4% of Minny's 79 FGAs
                          JO takes 20.4% of Indiana's 81 FGAs

                          So Minny plays slower and goes through KG more. I'm sorry Peck, but I don't think you hold your opinion on the matter accountable to the factual reality. Just as you love Dale at all costs, you dislike JO post offense at all costs, despite ANY results, as you've admitted (disliked the 61 win team).


                          Also, I've defended Jack and Tins on many occassions and even I found the image of them leading an up-tempo game HORRIBLE. They weren't good at trying to run off of TOs. It looked forced and they looked lost or uncomfortable. I was the one that put up the thread begging for no more running game specifically because of what they were doing (not JO dragging it down). It looked like a 10 year old YMCA league out there with the ball getting out of control all over the place and the Pacers trying to outscore opponents despite not having a ton of good scoring weapons.


                          BTW, Shaq in 95-96 with ORL was at 23.6% of their shots per game (a 60 win team no less), and all the perimeter shooters just waited for the double-team kick-out along the way. It got them to the Finals and knocked off a Pacers team along the way.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                            Naptown,
                            How does JO's FG percentage stack up against 95-96 Shaq and 2006-07 KG's?

                            I know KG has been above 50% in some seasons. I don't think JO ever has crested the 50% mark.

                            And I'm pretty sure you don't want to compare Shaq vs JO in shooting percentage.

                            And shooting percentage is a pretty important category when you're comparing the amount of shots taken by various players.

                            -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


                            • #29
                              Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                              OK... I looked it all up....

                              Shaq has been above 60% and has a current career avg of 58%.

                              Jermaine is at just under 45% this season with a career avg of 46%

                              KG is at just under 48% this season with a career avg of 49%

                              KG's best season was last season at 53%

                              JO's best season was 99-00 at Portland where he shot just under 49% (12mpg). He came very close to that percentage in Pacerland in 02-03 (which was his Pacer high).

                              Shaq's best season was 04-05 in Miami at .601 but then last season fell to .600
                              (60%)

                              Shaq's career low is this season at .521 (52%). In 95-96 he shot .573 (57%)

                              -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


                              • #30
                                Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                OK... I looked it all up....

                                Shaq has been above 60% and has a current career avg of 58%.

                                Jermaine is at just under 45% this season with a career avg of 46%

                                KG is at just under 48% this season with a career avg of 49%

                                KG's best season was last season at 53%

                                JO's best season was 99-00 at Portland where he shot just under 49% (12mpg). He came very close to that percentage in Pacerland in 02-03 (which was his Pacer high).

                                Shaq's best season was 04-05 in Miami at .601 but then last season fell to .600
                                (60%)

                                Shaq's career low is this season at .521 (52%)

                                -Bball
                                So you proved that KG and Shaq have had better careers than JO? Congrats?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X