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

Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

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

  • Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

    An opposing team's scout sizes up the Pacers

    I don't see this team going anywhere soon ...

    It all starts with their best player, Jermaine O'Neal, and he's in a place where they don't know if he's going to be there at the end of the year, because they would probably like to move him after shopping him during the summer. At 29, Jermaine is a guy who is on the downslope of his career. He isn't old but he's been playing in the league for a long time, and from a physical standpoint his body is breaking down more and more. So long as he lingers on that roster, their team will have no momentum with no upswing. What you see with veteran players like Jermaine is when they don't feel like they've got enough talent around them and the team doesn't have a real chance of winning, then they don't bring it every night. This year you'll probably see Allen Iverson playing harder in Denver than he did in Philadelphia, and you'll see Paul Pierce playing harder alongside Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen than he did when he was playing with Al Jefferson and Delonte West ...

    Jermaine doesn't have a great reputation when it comes to being a determined leader who sets a good example for his young teammates. The problem is he's due to make $19.7 million this year with a total of $64 million remaining over the three years on his contract. That's a lot of money for someone whose productivity has been in decline. Garnett makes similar money, but at least he's a warrior; you wouldn't say the same thing about Jermaine O'Neal. The only team that's going to trade for him is a team that's on the verge of winning, a team that's desperate to win now. And even then, Indiana would probably have to take back a ton of junk in bad contracts ...

    You could say O'Neal has extra mileage on his body because he came to the NBA straight out of high school, but then again he didn't play a lot during his initial four years in Portland. In any case, his body has deteriorated in recent years, though maybe part of it has to do with him losing his edge, his competitive spirit. That team was on a competitive run for a long time, but ever since Ron Artest's brawl in Detroit, they haven't been in the running. The other thing you see in O'Neal is that when guys get older, a lot of them learn they can take jumpers and score out on the perimeter and so they quit taking the ball to the rack. They all do it as a preservation tool, either because they don't want to get in great shape or they don't want to risk injury. It's like cheating a little bit in that they don't play with the same tenacity. O'Neal still has those good low-post, back-to-the-basket moves, especially on the left block coming over his left shoulder. But he's doing that less and taking the jumper more often. He's been getting hurt so much in recent years that it's like he's learned to play a different way ...

    The Pacers tried to turn a corner last year by getting rid of their troublemaker Stephen Jackson in the trade with Golden State. The problem is that it didn't improve their team talent-wise. Ike Diogu, Troy Murphy or Mike Dunleavy has got to step up from a PR standpoint as much as anything, to show their fans that not only did we get rid of trouble but we actually got some talent out of the trade ...

    So who can they rebuild around? It's not going to be Dunleavy, Murphy, Jamaal Tinsley or Jeff Foster. I don't see anybody to serve as a bridge to the future if they take Jermaine off the team. They have no identity, no presence. The only way I see them accomplishing anything this year is if somehow there's a cohesiveness on the team, and despite everything they just go out and play hard while guys like Tinsley and Danny Granger have breakout years. That's asking a lot ...

    I see Granger as an underachiever. He's still waiting to have a breakout year. He disappears for long periods of time. He'll put together two nice plays and then it will be another quarter before he makes his next nice play. There's a lack of urgency with him, and you don't see him playing hard or aggressive all of the time ...

    Now that Larry Bird is in charge of their basketball operations, you'll see him leaning on his scouts much as he did as coach of the Pacers when he leaned on Rick Carlisle and Dick Harter. That's no criticism whatsoever; he'll manage the situation and draw from the opinions of those he trusts. You would have to say he hasn't made any jaw-dropping or flamboyant moves yet ...

    I'm not sure what to make of coach Jim O'Brien. In Boston he was a breath of fresh air compared to Rick Pitino, so you can see why his players responded there. But then he went to Philadelphia with a domineering personality. That was a group of people at that franchise who had been there for a long time, they were kind of like family, and he came in with an attitude -- and next thing you know they're all ready to run him out of there. I suspect he's learned heavily from that situation, and he'll use this job to prove he can learn from his mistakes ...

    The first thing he'll do is try to establish Jermaine early, for two reasons -- first because his best chance of winning is to get the best player on his side, and second because if Jermaine is doing well, then more teams may call with trade offers for him. They'll want to make him look as enticing as possible for other teams in the league. He'll try to create big roles for Dunleavy and Murphy, and then it will come down to what kind of year Tinsley has ...

    Tinsley is on the wild side and I don't see him as a Jim O'Brien-type player. They've been very patient with him, but that's probably because they couldn't get anything for him in a trade. It's not like they're getting a lot of calls for him, so they'll have to continue to be patient. He has a lot of issues. He isn't the example of a professional if you watch his off-court stuff, so that while people may respect his talent, they won't necessarily respect him as a leader or teammate. Rick Carlisle couldn't trust him because he was a turnover waiting to happen, but in fairness to Tinsley, Carlisle has always been a coach who needs to control his team -- and so too has been O'Brien. Tinsley likes to play up and down, and in some ways he's at his best that way, and opponents fear him getting into his rhythm because he plays like a street player. But it can also be detrimental to the team because he makes so many mistakes ...

    Dunleavy can't guard quick perimeter players. He's a skilled, talented guy, but the skills don't translate into production. He's a smart guy, he knows what to do. But he's like an expensive car that can't get out of first gear. What he really needs is to find a really good team and then serve as the No. 5 starter or -- even better -- the sixth man on a team that knows what it's doing. You would love to play him off the bench against second-tier players whose athleticism will be a notch lower, and that will enable Dunleavy to put his smarts and skills into play. He could be the leader and playmaker of that second unit because he is at heart a complementary player. We all have to get over the fact that he was the third pick in the draft and see him for what he really is ...

    Murphy has tried it a lot of different ways. I've seen him bulk up and try to be a power player, then he's lost weight and tried to put the ball on the floor. What he is is a high-post elbow shooter with three-point range who I'm sure O'Brien will put to use. ...

    Diogu was a fan favorite at Golden State, an undersized power player people have forgotten about. If he could establish himself in the low post with a Malik Rose-style game, he could be a surprise for them ...

    Jeff Foster is very steady, the kind of floor-runner and rebounder everybody would love to have on their team ...

    Question marks are Marquis Daniels, with his decision-making, and David Harrison, who I'm not a fan of at all. Not only does he have injury issues with his shoulders but he's a bomb waiting to explode, a highly, highly volatile guy. [Indiana player personnel director] Mel Daniels loved him and has been his biggest cheerleader, and there must be something promising about him because otherwise they wouldn't have kept him. But every time I see him, it seems like he's involved in a near-fight with an opponent or he's being agitated because fans are letting him have it. I can't tell you how many times I've seen him having to be held back by his teammates, and one night in particular he lost it so badly it was like he was in a different world. I just don't think what he brings is worth putting up with that kind of stuff ...

    Who knows what Shawne Williams will turn into, but I'm sure they were disappointed by his recent legal trouble. The Pacers are probably thinking, Can we ever get away from these kinds of problems? It's hard to sell that kind of stuff to fans in Indiana ...

    I would be surprised if they are able to overcome what I see as this mood on the team that this group of players is not going anywhere. I think it's embedded in their organization, and that they can't go anywhere until they decide to fully commit to rebuilding, which will mean getting rid of some people -- starting with Jermaine. It's like if you're dating a girl and you know you're going to break up with her. Why prolong it? The sooner you break it off, the sooner you can get over her and move on. There's no reason to be going to all of the trouble in this league unless you're trying to win.
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/bas...es/pacers.html
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

    I disagree with what the scout says regarding the team having a mentality of "we aren't going anywhere". I don't buy that at all. I know they aren't stupid and aren't fooling themselves into saying they're contenders, but I think they believe they can win games and be a playoff team.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

      Are we sure Naptown Seth didn't write that?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

        I have feeling the comment about Harrison losing it so badly that he was in 'another world' might be the time he was knocked silly with a concussion in Memphis(?) and nobody at the time realized exactly what the problem was as he appeared to wander aimlessly at the timeout.

        I suppose unless you were a regular Pacer viewer and fan who followed that situation from its inception and thrn thru the local media to actually know what had happened, you might have a different idea about what you saw.

        And maybe that's not what he's talking about but I don't remember ever thinking Harrision was just 'in another world' with any of his 'issues' I've seen on the court or bench. That's not to say overall that the writer isn't correct in Harrison needing to control his temper/emotions better.
        .

        -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


        • #5
          Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

          This scout seems to contradict every quote we have heard locally from all Pacers. His views are superficial in my opinion-to the point of what is probably the opinion of the Pacers at this time from many people. However, I would almost call this article "dated" in some ways as he's basically promising more of the same as the end of last year. If that is the case, then changes will be made I'm sure.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

            when they don't feel like they've got enough talent around them and the team doesn't have a real chance of winning, then they don't bring it every night.
            Somebody forgot to mention this to JO. By far his best EFFORT has come the last 2 seasons, reaching highs in assists, piling up tons of shot blocks and leading the team in charges (in fact getting into the list of top charge guys in the entire league).

            Hardly phoning it in, and this despite plenty of good reason to do so (if there is such a thing as a good reason to phone in your high salary job).


            The other thing you see in O'Neal is that when guys get older, a lot of them learn they can take jumpers and score out on the perimeter and so they quit taking the ball to the rack.
            JO specifically had his game 8 rant because he was being asked to play out of the high post all the time, his FTAs were way down at that point. After the rant his FGAs stayed THE SAME, but his FTAs went right back up to his normal strong level. In other words, taking it to the rack and often with plenty of guys on him. He's ALWAYS been a mix of jumpers and play at the rim, ala KG or Bosh even. No way that's gotten worse.
            But he's doing that less and taking the jumper more often.
            Again, not true. Slower due to injury, sure. But his outside to inside ratio IMO runs close to the same. I'd have to see actual numbers disproving this to buy it, and I'm certain this guy doesn't have them.

            Tinsley likes to play up and down, and in some ways he's at his best that way, and opponents fear him getting into his rhythm because he plays like a street player. But it can also be detrimental to the team because he makes so many mistakes ...
            True, and hardly a secret. Rick preferred to contain the mistakes at the loss of Mel Mel rolling. There is hope from hardline Tins supporters that JOB will release the beast but so far we haven't really seen it. I have no problem calling him the wild card, we've been saying it for years.


            His scouting of Dun is dead-on and I think full of compliments, not just negatives. Dun isn't as fast as SGs like Redd or Wade and I'd have to question the sanity of anyone suggesting otherwise. So he's not the quick perimeter player you like to have at SG, but he is smart as this guy mentions. Dun is THE KEY to this team IMO. If he has the 3 going and if he can raise his athletic game enough to keep it from hurting more than his smarts helps, then the Pacers will probably surprise some people.

            I'd say this guy probably agrees with that and simply thinks that Dun doesn't have that level of athletic ability (mostly speed and hops in this case) to do that. I'm not as certain. So far in preseason he's hinted at being improved over last year.


            Question marks are Marquis Daniels, with his decision-making,
            Err, what? Quis has one real hole, his 3pt shot. Well two if you count injury concerns. Otherwise I ask "what's the problem?"


            Harrison he nails, but we all know the book on him by now too.


            Shawne he just pathetically brushes aside on the driver's license/plates "outrage". Who gives a s***, seriously? If you like Danny how can you not also like Shawne? He's way more important than hinted at here.


            I would be surprised if they are able to overcome what I see as this mood on the team that this group of players is not going anywhere. I think it's embedded in their organization,
            Did he forget JOB suddenly? Mood will not be the issue. Talent limits are the issue, along with injuries to top guys like JO, Tins, Quis, Troy and Jeff, all of whom seem certain to miss 8 games or more based on recent history and the start to this season.

            The thing is that he mentions just how big a mood change JOB brought in the past, so much so that Philly didn't want him there. But then he forgets about it in this portion?



            Look, I agree with him that that team seemingly has little reason to be expected to outperform last year, but I disagree that it's "oh hell, just punt on this Titanic team now" time either. As much as I expect a tough season, JOB alone and the promise of Dun, Danny, Shawne and Ike are enough for me to see a light at the end of the tunnel possibly.

            No way you chalk this up as "just trade JO now, you're F'd".

            This scout seems to contradict every quote we have heard locally from all Pacers.
            Having just said that, on the flipside let's not just eat up the spoonfed local hype machine either. There is a reason that national outlets contradict what the Pacers have to say about things - the national reporters aren't trying to sell seats to local fans.

            I don't even think Mark, Bruno and Mike are spinning for the Pacers like many posters do, but there is no denying that they, like us, are big targets for the Pacers spin machine. TPTB want to impress them so they'll say great things that then impress us. The national guys are out of the loop both on inside details AND the glad-handing hype.
            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 10-24-2007, 02:21 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

              Bball, you must not have heard the Denver story when AB1077, myself and our buddy we're sitting row 2 about 10 feet from the ultimate Hulk-out. It didn't make the broadcast due to camera angle and then a foul timeout commercial break.

              We seriously felt fear for the ref and anyone else that looked at him funny. I though they weren't going to get him off the court safely. You know in cartoons when guys have steam coming out of their ears? If it had happened that night I honestly wouldn't have been surprised.

              David did get screwed on the deal; it wasn't that he got mad, it was just how out of control mad he got.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                What team does this guy scout for? Especially after reading tbird's scouting descriptions, this article seems pretty shallow and focuses way too much on motivation and internal thought processes rather than actual play from the preseason.

                Of course, the article could have been written before the preseason started, but that seems like a bit of a risk to me.
                BillS

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

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                  Well, everyone here knows the players much much more than even most scouts. When he analyses individual players, OK, he gets some things right but then relies on "instinct" about other issues where he comes up a little short.

                  But then when he talks about the culture of the Pacers, and the internal motivations of the players, he's completely out to lunch. In the end, I wonder why that information is important in the first place. It won't help other teams beat us.

                  Hopefully none of our guys care enough to read this crap.
                  “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                  “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                    BillS and I ride together.
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                      It is obvious this writer has to write a article on the pacers and did little to no research on the team and went off old incidents and past play.

                      No where did he mention how the team was doing so far and who had improved and what to watch out for from this team.

                      He just focused on the negatives from former players and basically said JO is on the decline. I wish I had my 5 min back from reading that hogwash

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                        It is easier to focus on the negative side of things and he (Ian) dwells on it far too much. It seems like he wrote this piece before the pre-season. If I was any of the players I would just disregard it or better yet use it as motivation this season.
                        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                          I think that's probably the most accurate analysis on Mike Dunleavy from any national (non-local) writer I've seen.

                          Perhaps he can get out of 1st gear in Indy, but that paragraph pretty much described his career in GS. Had visible skills, but they just didn't translate into consistent production. Probably best suited as a 6th man (just like Al Harrington, in all honesty).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                            I thought the article was fair, but six months late. Write this at the end of last season, and it would be hard to disagree with. As it is, I thought he missed the boat quite a bit, but those weaknesses have already been pointed out.

                            This, though, I get. Not sure I totally agree, but I get it.

                            I think . . . that they can't go anywhere until they decide to fully commit to rebuilding, which will mean getting rid of some people -- starting with Jermaine. It's like if you're dating a girl and you know you're going to break up with her. Why prolong it? The sooner you break it off, the sooner you can get over her and move on. There's no reason to be going to all of the trouble in this league unless you're trying to win.
                            I've felt that way before, no doubt.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Ian Thomsen's Pacers Scouting Report (SI.com)

                              I don't have time right now to breakdown what was said in that article, but there was a lot of stuff I agree with - just a lot of insight

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X