Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

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

  • #31
    Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
    I agree with you that RC's style initially suited the roster he had to work with, but even you have to admit that when that roster began to change RC's coaching style did not.

    Example, while the Pacers still had JO and Foster as their only legit Bigs, RC continued to push the inside/outside game. By that time, the team had lost Artest, Al and Crosher. In return, they got Murphy and Ike, and had Harrison as a "up and coming Center"......and yet RC still pushed the inside/outside game. Granted, JO and Foster were still here, but I seriously doubt anyone would have believed that any combination of JO and any other Big on this roster post-Artest would have been as formidable as JO/Artest!! When you're able to get nearly 40 ppg from two of your front-court starters...'Nuff Said, but I'll elaborate anyway just so every understands where I'm coming from.

    The Pacers had lost both Jones Boys, Reggie and SJax, and got Peja on a six month loan......threw away James White before the season inwhich he was drafted even began, and got Dunleavy, Ike and Murphy - a PF who would rather play like a SG - and a few other up and coming players through the draft and/or trades.

    Do you see where I'm going with this? The makeup of the team slowly began to change, but RC continued to push his style of play on the roster. Granted, some of those changes occured during the course of a season, but many of them occured during the off-season which should have given him time to make the adjustments necessary to find an offense that truly fit the roster he had. But he didn't. That's why I said during the summer of '06 that the only way you bring RC back was if he got players who truly fit his coaching style.

    In reality, no matter what position one may have wanted to "plugged" players into, the '06-07 Pacers had 7-Guards (Tinsley, Armstrong, McLeod, Daniels, Green, Dunleavy, and Marshall), 5 Forwarded (Baston, Willliams, Murphy, Granger and Ike), and 3 Centers (JO, Foster and Harrison). The only way a true inside/outside scheme works is if you have good shooters and a helluva dominate interior presence.

    JO and Artest gave the Pacers that dominante interior presence in '04-05. That's why they could afford to get away with not having another dominate Center to spar JO. You just plugged Crosher out there w/Foster and left Artest on the floor and you still had a rebounder, and shooter (w/Reggie sometimes) and a interior presence in Artest. That all began to change w/the Brawl, and the Pacers have never been able to acquire a "manageable" roster ever since. By "manageable", I'm referring to TPTB being able to move away from "damage control...patch-work mode w/the roster" to truly bringing in the types of players they want to play the brand of basketball they (including the coach) envision. That's still going to take another year or two, but they'll get there. In the meanwhile, JOB has to find those players on today's roster who fit his style of basketball. I think he's one player away from doing that.

    IMO, the Pacers need another low-post player who can spare JO and give them 8-10 ppg and play some defense. I had hoped Ike or Harrison would be able to do that, but it's beginning to look as if both are a wash. If TPTB can acquire that player by the trade deadline w/o losing any of (who I believe are) the core players (1-8, but not necessarily in that order: JO, Granger, Dunleavy, Rush, Deiner, Williams, Quis, and dare I say it...Tinsley), I think this small-ball lineup of JOB's could very well work indeed.

    Sidenote: I liked RC. I thought he was a very good coach, but he he was burned out and IMO had lost the team long before the end of last season. All the Artest/Brawl drama and then the injuries, etc., etc. It's alot to ask of anyone man to endure. If he ever returns to coaching in the NBA, I'd wish him well.
    I agree with what you are saying, however I don't know that it is a fault of Rick's that he coached "his style" till the end.

    Do you think that Jim O'Brien would somehow change his style if he were presented with a roster of players who did not fit? Or would he try and make them play his way?

    My guess is that coach's in general will not adapt to the team, they want the team to addapt to them.

    I still believe Carlisle was a great coach and got a bum rap here, but I am also of the opinion that his time had come and it was time to move on.

    As you said, last season was not the first season he had lost the team.

    The one great fault that I find in the last half of his tenure is this.

    He either did not know how to coach Jermaine O'Neal or he had no choice in how he coached Jermaine O'Neal.

    I've said it before and I will say it till I die, Rick did not coach the style of play we saw here other than when he was with Jermaine. He did not coach that way in Detroit, he did not assistant coach that way when he was here in the 90's, he did not coach that way during the brawl and suspenion year.

    Again, I don't know if it was because this is what Rick thought was best. Whether J.O. would not accept any other role or whether management said this is the way it had to be. I just don't know.

    All I know is that our offense became predictable, easily guardable and stagnate, not to mention boring to watch.

    But you do bring to the table a good point about all of the talent we have lost over the years, it's not just the G.S. trade.


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

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      I won't believe this until you quote it from somewhere. I've asked before and gotten no response.

      My Dad played for John Wooden, I've been to his house. And I've never heard anything growing up except how important it is to box out.

      I'm not saying it's impossible for me to be wrong. But I'll need some documentation.
      I'm going on what I heard him say, in person. I saw him speak at Hinkle Fieldhouse 6 or so ago, and when he said it the place went deafly quiet, like they couldn't believe he just said that.

      This doesn't have a source either, but considering this thread was the second link from a google search I doubt a lot is going to be turned up anyway.

      I used to coach boxing out and still do some boxing out drills, but they alone are not enough.
      Since every college coach in America pays lip service to John Wooden, I will quote him on the three most important aspects of rebounding:
      1. Assume every shot will be missed
      2. Get your hands above your shoulders
      3. Go get the ball
      http://www.utefans.net/archive.php?action=View&id=2856

      Notice there is no mention of finding a man, putting a body on a man, nothing about making contact with anything but the ball.

      The author goes on with his observations:
      The Utes are really bad at #2 and #3. They are so focused on boxing out that they have their hands down around their waste trying to contain their opponent, and their weight is leaning away from the basket, and they just stay there when the ball hits the rim, rather than GOING TO GET THE BALL, which is the real point of rebounding anyway. Bogut didn't box out much, but he went and got the ball.
      I now try to teach my teams to 'clear out' -- go make contact with your opponent, push him out of the lane, then step away to get some separation and GO GET THE BALL.
      The highlited part is what Coach Wooden said was his reasoning. He said that he found players turned it more into a fight over positioning than it was a fight over the ball. They would be so concerned with boxing out they forgot why they were boxing out in the first place.

      I'm not saying which I think is better, I'm just saying there are different coaching philosophies about rebounding and JOB might be the reasoning behind it as opposed to the actual player.

      But it still doesn't negate the fact that Foster doesn't box out and no one has a problem with it. He just beats his man, and everyone for that matter, to the ball. I think he "steals" a lot of rebounds from his teammates because of it.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

        I think Wooden's method was "Check and go"... And I think it's still "boxing out". The only difference is how quickly you release and go for the ball.

        And when you see a player smoke JO like he did in the GSW game you know there was no 'check' part to JO's rebounding method.

        -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


        • #34
          Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

          Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
          JO and Artest gave the Pacers that dominante interior presence in '04-05. That's why they could afford to get away with not having another dominate Center to spar JO. You just plugged Crosher out there w/Foster and left Artest on the floor and you still had a rebounder, and shooter (w/Reggie sometimes) and a interior presence in Artest. That all began to change w/the Brawl, and the Pacers have never been able to acquire a "manageable" roster ever since. By "manageable", I'm referring to TPTB being able to move away from "damage control...patch-work mode w/the roster" to truly bringing in the types of players they want to play the brand of basketball they (including the coach) envision. That's still going to take another year or two, but they'll get there. In the meanwhile, JOB has to find those players on today's roster who fit his style of basketball. I think he's one player away from doing that.
          Very, very, good!

          This is THE paragraph for those who wonder what the Pacers are doing.

          I think they still need to do some damage control. I think Tinsley and Harrison need to go too. The problem is Tinsley is our starting point guard and we need to get another viable point before getting rid of him.

          Myself, I would probably gamble and get rid of him and hope we get his replacement in the draft.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

            Will,

            The problem w/moving Tinsley IMO is the same w/moving JO, Dunleavy and Murhpy - their huge contracts!

            Hypothetically speaking, someone might be willing to take a chance on JO only because he was an All-Star and he's still a defensive force. He may not be putting up the numbers he did a year or so ago, but there's still some production in him. Truth is, his game is alot more rounded than it was 2-3 yrs ago, and that adds to his value. The fact that he's not getting the ball 18-20 apg but has still managed to score in the mid-upper teens is pretty good!

            Tinsley's putting up All-Star-like numbers, but his end-game performance plus is decision making at times are questionable. I sure teams have inquired about him, but I'm not sure if he alone would garner this team a quality player in his place.

            Murphy is alot like Foster in that he's a "servicable" player. Meaning that he'll never be a true starting C/PF; any team who wants him has to know exactly how they intend to "plug" him into their system.

            Of the four players on this team w/large contracts, Dunleavy is probably the best trade commodity of the group. His stats have improved and have remained constant. He's a "system" player, but he's shown he can be creative at times as well.

            So, I don't think it will be easy to move any of these players right now. That's why in the section of my most post you've quoted I said it's going to atleast another 2 yrs before TPTB can start making some moves because teams are more willing to take on expiring or near-expiring contracts in trades than they are contracts w/3+ yrs remaining on them.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              I think I predicted something like 32 wins for the year. We're actually above my expectations right now.

              But the reason you allow 32 wins this year is because you'll be a lot better next year. So what are we doing to get better next year?
              Is murdering your way to the top still out?

              Just checking. The alternate plans seem to be running thin.
              Carn-son-it, dagnabbit, and assorted other old man grumbles.


              The one ray of hope was the blurb in the Star about all the other times the team was way below .500 with more losses than they have now where they turned it on to make the playoffs (with at least 40 wins each time I believe).

              Of course that's not a plan for the future, that's finding a way to win a little with what they've got.


              Do you think that Jim O'Brien would somehow change his style if he were presented with a roster of players who did not fit? Or would he try and make them play his way?
              Ummmm, is this a trick question? I mean you do know his style and who is on this roster, right? Thin at the 3 ball though Dun has saved it with a monster adjustment, weak with stars that create their own shot ala AI or Pierce, weak on perimeter defense. And $20m of the payroll is on a slow-down post scorer who must play because he's the only one holding the defense together.

              I'd say there aren't many rosters that are a bigger mismatch to JOB's style, and I'm pretty sure he's been trying to make it work anyway. I don't fault him, Bird knew who he was when he was hired. You do what you do, if they didn't want that they would have picked someone else.

              some of those changes occured during the course of a season, but many of them occured during the off-season which should have given him time to make the adjustments necessary to find an offense that truly fit the roster he had. But he didn't.
              And even pre-trade Rick DID TRY to force the roster to be uptempo, which was a mistake IMO because it was neither his style nor appropriate for the roster he had. That was an adjustment made in the summer after the FIRST TIME EVER that Rick ONLY made it to the first round of the playoffs. What a freaking loser, time to change styles.

              That roster was headed for .500 yet again pre-trade. And expecting a massive overhaul when the major trade happened mid-season is crazy.

              And yet Rick DID CHANGE things. When Dun arrived Rick used him as a spot up 3 ball. After that proved to be a mistake he stopped it and put Dun coming off 2pt curls and reduced his 3pt attempts (stats back this, not just opinion). Murph he started having go off dribble once he saw that he could. And it's not like anyone at PD was saying "boy Ike stinks, he chokes in the double team every time" at the time of the trade. In fact most of you were jocking Ike pretty hard. So like us, Rick had to learn Ike's game over time and adjust.

              Tell me what JOB is doing with Ike that Rick didn't do? Exactly. And Harrison? Has JOB benched Tins in favor of the backup like RICK DID (Anderson, AJ, even Saras got a little run)? Has JOB not put Quis (and others) deep on the bench out of nowhere? Didn't Rick have to make do without Quis for most of the post-trade period, his main scorer off the dribble?

              Look at the brawl year, look at the 3pt attempts before and after that. There's your flipping adjustment. They went from like 15-16 to 25-30 per game. If that's not changing style to match your roster I don't know what is.

              And frankly I still hear you guys moaning about JOB having them feed the ball to JO. Anyone want to tell me what play JOB called to end the GS game? Anyone? I know, it was SOOOO different than what you guys say Rick did, right?

              I'm sorry about the tone, but GD'it. There is a veritable laundry list of proof here that shows that Rick did adjust and that JOB has come to a lot of the same conclusions. I mean get back to me when JOB actually has won more than 35 with this group. I'm not saying he won't, but I am saying he's getting credit for solving something when the results aren't in yet and the current projection says nothing is different.

              But why should I be surprised. 3 games in we had the Tins was right, Rick was wrong thread.
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-16-2008, 01:57 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                Very, very, good!

                This is THE paragraph for those who wonder what the Pacers are doing.

                I think they still need to do some damage control. I think Tinsley and Harrison need to go too. The problem is Tinsley is our starting point guard and we need to get another viable point before getting rid of him.

                Myself, I would probably gamble and get rid of him and hope we get his replacement in the draft.
                I do agree that bit by NuffSaid was solid. I do think the roster situation is that way.


                I just think NS, Peck and some others still don't recognize that JOB is struggling through basically the same issues as Rick, which is basically trying to deal with a team that doesn't fit ANY styles.

                I mean who would win more with this team, is this team built for the triangle? Or Utah's front line passing schemes? They don't have great defenders, they don't have a huge list of strong shooters, they don't have great speed or quickness or size.

                3pt shooting in JAN, you've got 4 guys with 20 attempts
                Dun and Danny, over 40%, awesome
                But that's your SF and PF in small ball where Dun doesn't get beat by speed on defense as much.
                At PG/SG you have Rush and Diener, both sub-31%. 31.

                If you didn't like Jack's poor shooting, then WTF is there to like about Rush shooting 30% on nearly 5 attempts per game? That's your backcourt shooting. And thanks to only playing 4 games I didn't mention Tinsley's 1 for flipping 13 (8%) from 3 this month.

                And good lord Tins and Troy are both SUB 1.00 on Points per Shot (in Jan) which is just off the charts bad. 1.10-1.15 is your "poor" range on that. Average guys run 1.20 area, stars run closer to 1.40.

                And among the top 20 Assist per game players Tinsley ranks as one of the worst in Assist to TO ratio. The guys worse than him tend to be primary self-scorers like AI, Wade and Lebron...you know, guys who's PPS is hella higher than sub-1.00.

                This roster just isn't functioning nearly as well as some people think, there is a real problem of mismatched talent, not just 1-2 guys away. Just like last year the "depth" stems as much from not having high quality starting talent as it does from having some great bench.

                It's not about "if only they would play a different style". It's about getting a more functional mix of players. Then the style that suits them as a group will become more apparent I think.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  It's not about "if only they would play a different style". It's about getting a more functional mix of players. Then the style that suits them as a group will become more apparent I think.
                  I hate to just post "me too" but...

                  Me too.
                  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


                  • #39
                    Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

                    I didn't think I was gonna end up watching the game because I knew the outcome and score, but I watched it after classes this morning.

                    JO shouldn't be faulted at the end of his lack of boxing out. Beidrins (sp?) was on his left and Barnes was right behind him. No one rotated down when the Ws were swinging the ball. Most rebounds come off weakside, and JO protected the weakside. It caught the back of the rim and bounced off straight.

                    Could he have done better? Sure, but other than being so low almost under the basket he did what he should have.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X