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

Overpaid Pacers.

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

  • #46
    Re: Overpaid Pacers.

    For what it's worth. Most of them, I agree with. Incidently, I saw this article after I started the thread.



    http://www.emptythebench.com/2007/03...rpaid-players/
    .

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Overpaid Pacers.

      Originally posted by Roferr View Post
      What do you mean, that I just now thought it up? Who are you to tell me what I'm thinking?

      I've thought for a long while now that JO is overpaid. Whenever a low-post player ranks 50th in the league in shooting pct. among forwards (and this doesn't even include centers), he is not worth over $18 million.
      Sure JO is overpaid....I'm just tryna let you know that the idea that someone who makes twice as much as someone else should produce twice is much is patently ridiculous and is not a real method of comparison that has any value.

      Shawn Marion makes $15 million, Amare makes $12 - Should Marion be scoring, rebounding and blocking 1.25 more than Amare?

      Dirk makes twice what Jason Terry does, is supposed to put up 33.4 ppg because of that?

      Iverson is gonna make 2.5x what Carmelo does next year...Does he now have to go out and drop 58 per now?

      The multiplier idea is just flawed. All I'm saying.
      Read my Pacers blog:
      8points9seconds.com

      Follow my twitter:

      @8pts9secs

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Overpaid Pacers.

        Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
        Sure JO is overpaid....I'm just tryna let you know that the idea that someone who makes twice as much as someone else should produce twice is much is patently ridiculous and is not a real method of comparison that has any value.

        Shawn Marion makes $15 million, Amare makes $12 - Should Marion be scoring, rebounding and blocking 1.25 more than Amare?

        Dirk makes twice what Jason Terry does, is supposed to put up 33.4 ppg because of that?

        Iverson is gonna make 2.5x what Carmelo does next year...Does he now have to go out and drop 58 per now?

        The multiplier idea is just flawed. All I'm saying.

        I can see where you're coming from but I think you've missed the entire intent of my thread. I was tired of repeatedly hearing how much overpaid Murph and Dun were that I thought I would point out that they weren't the only ones.

        Up until the start of the 2005 season, JO was worth the money. He truly was one of the elite big men (top 8-9) in the league. When he tried to develop his 12-15 foot fade-away and then announce it before the start of the season that it was going to be his bread and butter and fail miserably at it is when I started to have my doubts that he was worth his money.

        My gosh, all his dinks and dunks just raised his shooting to 43-44% so he had to be missing a ton of jumpers. Well, in fact, I know he was because I watched him game in and game out miss the vast majority of them.

        Whether because of his body, racked with injuries or lack of will power he ceased to be the monster he was down low. You're not going very far when your best player is shooting such a low pct. Most good low-post players are shooting around 52-55% and even higher.

        This is not as much as a knock on JO as it is on passing the blame around as far as not earning one's wages.
        .

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Overpaid Pacers.

          Originally posted by Roferr View Post
          I can see where you're coming from but I think you've missed the entire intent of my thread. I was tired of repeatedly hearing how much overpaid Murph and Dun were that I thought I would point out that they weren't the only ones.

          Up until the start of the 2005 season, JO was worth the money. He truly was one of the elite big men (top 8-9) in the league. When he tried to develop his 12-15 foot fade-away and then announce it before the start of the season that it was going to be his bread and butter and fail miserably at it is when I started to have my doubts that he was worth his money.

          My gosh, all his dinks and dunks just raised his shooting to 43-44% so he had to be missing a ton of jumpers. Well, in fact, I know he was because I watched him game in and game out miss the vast majority of them.

          Whether because of his body, racked with injuries or lack of will power he ceased to be the monster he was down low. You're not going very far when your best player is shooting such a low pct. Most good low-post players are shooting around 52-55% and even higher.

          This is not as much as a knock on JO as it is on passing the blame around as far as not earning one's wages.
          Gotcha...And I agree that JO "should" be making about 3 million less per year. But as others have pointed out, the economics of the NBA and the rules of the CBA were different back when JOs contract was issued. And yes, JO has regressed a little bit due to injury, lack of agressiveness and (IMO) frustration.

          But even with 20/20 hindsight, TPTB would probably give JO the exact same deal again if they could go back in time. Because if they didn't, he would not have been on this team now or for the last few years. Overpaying to keep premier (or close to premier depending on how you feel about JO) talent is not gonna hurt you that bad as a franchise. But overpaying millions for marginal talent can, though.

          However, overpaying one maringal talent like Murphy by $2-3 million per year won't kill us. But that plus Dunleavy, plus Tinsley and especially the length of the contract is the real issue. And TPTB knowingly took on these guys fully aware that they have terrible contracts.

          Essentially, my point is that JO's contract became somewhat of a mistake years down the road, which is unfortunate. By contrast, Murphy and Dunleavy's contracts were a known problem before they ever even put on a Pacer uniform. To me, that's the real difference and that's the issue that everyone has with them being overpaid.
          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Overpaid Pacers.

            We all get the picture, you dislike JO.

            the math you use however is so flawed it aint even funny any more.

            By those same maths Tinsley is "underpaid" in comparison


            JO is 31st in EFF rating, 3rd in blocks, 14th in double doubles (in only 69 games)


            If you fail to see why JO is getting what he gets, then why start the discussion about what he gets in the first place, next you gonna compare him to a bricklayer?

            Oh and btw, why do you compare him only to Murphleavy? is that because of the fact that your math would go limping out the window if you involved for instance Tinsley, Diogu, Quis, Granger?
            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Overpaid Pacers.

              No one in the NBA is as overpaid as Murphy and Dunleavy are, no one. I rather have Jerome James' contract then Dunleavys or Murphys.

              LMAO @ Comparing those two to Jermaine O'Neal. Ohh and the FG%, what is he supposed to shoot when he is the only player on this team that demands that someone guards him. Our 1,2,and 3 stand around the 3 point line and brick shot after shot. Wilt would suck with all these dudes on his team. Jermaine's FG% was not that low until the trade was made and he was put on a team with Dunleavy and Murphy who NO ONE wants to guard and who cant do nothing by themselves.

              Put KG or Duncan on this team and we will see how amazing they would be doing.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                No one in the NBA is as overpaid as Murphy and Dunleavy are, no one. I rather have Jerome James' contract then Dunleavys or Murphys.

                LMAO @ Comparing those two to Jermaine O'Neal. Ohh and the FG%, what is he supposed to shoot when he is the only player on this team that demands that someone guards him. Our 1,2,and 3 stand around the 3 point line and brick shot after shot. Wilt would suck with all these dudes on his team. Jermaine's FG% was not that low until the trade was made and he was put on a team with Dunleavy and Murphy who NO ONE wants to guard and who cant do nothing by themselves.

                Put KG or Duncan on this team and we will see how amazing they would be doing.

                And I hope we get the chance to see what KG would do with this team, because JO has not led them anywhere but to mediocracy.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                  Ohh and KG has lead the TWolves to a whole bunch of ****. They got all kinds of rafters up in their arena for Randy Foye and Rashad McCants lottery draftings.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                    Every pro athlete is overpaid when you compare their profession to that of the people in the world that actually make a difference every day. Why do we care if someone is overpaid? Leave that to the GM (or GM's in the Pacers case) to deal with.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                      Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot
                      Good Point. He's getting paid like Rip or Prince. There are a few other 2/3 guys making roughly the same as MDJ......Caron Butler, Mike Miller,Manu, Cuttino Mobley...who I'd rather have too.
                      Dunleavy can do a lot of good things so i don't have a problem with his salary. We wouldn't be having this conversation about Dunleavy's contract except that he is packaged with Murphy who is a bust and who unlike Dunleavy can't play any position on the floor. Yes he doesn't have the best bang for the buck but he is a very decent backup at 2 positions.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                        Originally posted by Roferr View Post
                        I don't think JO was overpaid until the last couple of season when he developed his fade-away jumper that he connects on about 25%. I've repeatedly pointed out this fact. If he would take the ball to the hoop instead of shooting from the outside, he would be much more effective.

                        When you take that many outside jumpers (and fade-aways at that, where he is invariably short) your shooting pct. is going to plummet.
                        Ok, now this I can definitely agree with. I hate that Jermaine's percentage has gone down this season, and I'd love to see it back up closer to 50%. The problem, to me, is that we've put him in a system where he has to shoot fadeaway jumpers to get shots.

                        Jermaine's simply not as good in a static system as he is in a dynamic one. That's just all there is to it. At the same time, giving him the ball at 18' and telling him to make something happen is just as bad. Jermaine's a post player, but today's NBA doesn't allow post players much room if the rest of the team doesn't need guarding.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          Ok, now this I can definitely agree with. I hate that Jermaine's percentage has gone down this season, and I'd love to see it back up closer to 50%. The problem, to me, is that we've put him in a system where he has to shoot fadeaway jumpers to get shots.

                          Jermaine's simply not as good in a static system as he is in a dynamic one. That's just all there is to it. At the same time, giving him the ball at 18' and telling him to make something happen is just as bad. Jermaine's a post player, but today's NBA doesn't allow post players much room if the rest of the team doesn't need guarding.
                          And conversely, if your post player demands the ball and a large chunk of the offense to run thru him (or your coach installs that type of system)... then offensive flow goes out the window... and you become an easy team to defend if your centerpiece is not on a whole other level. You also castrate your guards and wing players to a large degree.

                          Our perimeter game is never going to look good as long as we play that way.

                          And chemistry will always falter with JO being used the way we do because he is just not good enough.

                          -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


                          • #58
                            Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                            Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                            Yes he doesn't have the best bang for the buck but he is a very decent backup at 2 positions.
                            For a decent backup, he's overpaid. There are a number of guys in the NBA who bring similar games to the table for less money. I'm not trying to single MDJ out. I think the Pacers possess a number of bad contracts, including his, that put them in a poor position. They are paying at least four backup quality players starter money. This has become a major concern of mine in the last 6 months. The six highest paid Pacers are JO, Murphy, Dunleavy, Daniels, Tinsley and Foster in that order. How many truely see those six guys as a major force? I see (to varying degrees) five borderline starters and an all-star type player. JO likely has 3 years left, Murphy has 4, Dunleavy has 4, Daniels has at least 2, Tinsley has 4 and Foster likely has 2. With Ike, Granger and Williams the only other significant players on the roster and all with team options after next season, at a certain point somebody is going to walk away a free agent. That doesn't even account for the other 6 roster spots that will need to be filled every season or future draft picks. Will it matter in 2009 when the Pacers have $50 million tied up in JO, Murphy, Dunleavy and Tinsley while Diogu and Granger are free agents? $50 million dollars in those four players is a bad situation.

                            With all the question marks surrounding the aforementioned players, there's no room for error. Tinsley has to get his drive and health back, JO can't miss 20 games a season, Daniels knee has to be okay, Murphy can't play soft, Dunleavy has to show more than just "High IQ", Foster must remain Foster and management can't fumble a draft pick away (Bender, Haskins, Brezec, Harrison) or make poor decisions (GS trade, resigning of Al at the expense of a 1st rounder, gambling on future "headcases", James White). More importantly, a decision on the coach has to be very well thought out, Danny Granger better pan out, Shawne Williams must at least improve as much as Granger did and Ike must be infinitely better than David Harrison.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Ok, now this I can definitely agree with. I hate that Jermaine's percentage has gone down this season, and I'd love to see it back up closer to 50%. The problem, to me, is that we've put him in a system where he has to shoot fadeaway jumpers to get shots.

                              Jermaine's simply not as good in a static system as he is in a dynamic one. That's just all there is to it. At the same time, giving him the ball at 18' and telling him to make something happen is just as bad. Jermaine's a post player, but today's NBA doesn't allow post players much room if the rest of the team doesn't need guarding.
                              Agreed, somewhat. I think it was JO's decision to develop the fade-away jumper as he announced it at the beginning of the '05 season. This was about the same time that Jeff mentioned that he had been working on his jumper over the summer and was going to attempt a few if they fit into the team's style of play. Well, needless to say, when JO started shooting his jumper, Jeff's shooting was out of the question (actually he had honed a pretty decent jumper from 8 ft or so).

                              I thought, cool, JO has added a jumper to his repertoire, only to make him a double edge sword....good post game plus decent outside shot. However, he leaned heavily on his jumper and forgot to play his post game. When a guy his size can shoot in close or dunk with either hand, he would be almost unstoppable. However, repeatedly he leaned more and more towards his jumper and the Pacers lived and died almost in direct proportion to his shooting pct. from the outside.

                              I'm not blaming the Pacer's miserable showing on JO but he certainly contributed to it in a big way by not going to his strength....low post play.
                              .

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                                Originally posted by able View Post
                                We all get the picture, you dislike JO.

                                the math you use however is so flawed it aint even funny any more.

                                By those same maths Tinsley is "underpaid" in comparison


                                JO is 31st in EFF rating, 3rd in blocks, 14th in double doubles (in only 69 games)


                                If you fail to see why JO is getting what he gets, then why start the discussion about what he gets in the first place, next you gonna compare him to a bricklayer?

                                Oh and btw, why do you compare him only to Murphleavy? is that because of the fact that your math would go limping out the window if you involved for instance Tinsley, Diogu, Quis, Granger?
                                Man, talk about mixing apples and oranges!

                                If you would have read all my posts you would certainly find that I don't dislike JO and have said so numerous times. I don't know whether I should be replying to such an irrational post for fear of wasting my time.

                                I only started this thread because Dun and Murph were the only players being jumped on for being overpaid...not Tinsley, Ike, Quis or Granger. If they had been repeatedly hammered with the same crap non-stop, I would have posted in their favor. I was so sick and tired of hearing this crapola being repeated over and over that I made a point to show that those two were not the only players overpaid on a mediocre team.

                                As I've said in numerous posts (if you would have read them, maybe you have and are conveniently omitting them), I think JO is a great player and it has only been in the last two seasons since he's relied on his jumper that he has failed as the leader of the team.

                                If I had used my math on the four players you mentioned, the differences would have been that much more pronounced. If you would have bothered to done any math at all, you would have known this fact. Using the same method as I used with Dun and Murph, JO would be much more overpaid than with the other four. Nothing has gone flying out the window but your willingness to do a little research and come up with your own explanation instead of throwing a few haphazard, faulty statements out.
                                .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X