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

Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

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

  • Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

    My draft threads continue today with Center Kosta Koufos, from Ohio State University. I chose Koufos to write about next for a variety of factors, including that it is rumored that he has a private workout with the Pacers next week, and because he played in the Big Ten Conference, so I watched him play live more than I did some of the other prospects in the draft.

    Koufos has one major strength to his game, which is that he is clearly big enough to handle the rigors of the position he is asked to play. At 7'1, 250 lbs or so, he is one of the biggest kids in the draft, and as the old cliche goes "you cannot teach size." Because of the lack of players with his size in the draft, it is likely that one team will roll the dice and take the 19 year old big man in the mid first round, and hope he pans out to be a legitimate starting post player in the league for years to come.

    While I believe that are some players in this draft who are hard to evaluate, and that different evaluators than myself can reasonably disagree, I find it hard to believe that my above statement that Koufos will be drafted in the 10-20 range can legitimately be true. I will spend the next few paragraphs of this article explaining what I believe to be fact, which is that Kosta Koufos just simply can't play. In my coaching vernacular, the blanket statement "he can't play" is about as damning as it gets.

    I saw somewhere where a columnist said that (I am paraphrasing here) that "you would think being able to make a layup would be a requirement to be drafted." The player the columnist was referring to was Koufos, who has an alarming lack of ability to finish around the basket, mainly because he is a complete stiff with little lift or power.

    Koufos has the ability to make an uncontested face up jumper, I will grant you that. But while Kevin Love is a rare find because he makes CONTESTED SHOTS, Koufos didn't make a tough shot all year that I saw live. When wide open, he can score some.....but then again, so can most of you who are reading this today. Koufos also has the ability to make a simple right hand jump hook, a nice move that will easily be taken away in the NBA by smart defenders, or in extreme cases, a double team.

    Koufos won't be able to improve I don't think, because he lacks the athleticism to do so. He has no lift on his turnaround to his other shoulder, and he gets his shot blocked or altered way more than any big kid should. He can't finsih strong with authority, because he is soft and takes forever to gather the ball and go up with with force in traffic. He does have decent hands, so he catches the ball ok, but he doesnt do anything with it once he has it.

    He also will likely never develop a countermove, because he has a maddening tendency to always turn to use his right hand. Koufos simply so far as shown no ability to use his left hand inside, which makes him extremely easy to guard, even by smaller guys at the college level. I shudder to think what may happen to him against real competition of players his own size in the NBA. You'd think a player at his age and experience level wouldn't have this issue at this point, but his slow development in this area would lead me as an evaluator to question his aptitude for being taught the game at a much higher level, or his willingness to learn new things.

    As a screener, he is fairly effective. He gets decent angles, and his size makes him hard to get through or around. However, his passivity is maddening to me, as he often doesnt really physically "stick" a hard screen when he could, instead he just sometimes brushes people lightly. This is in my view a big reason why the Buckeyes struggled so mightily to score, many of the sets Coach Motta ran ended up being contested jumpers instead of wide open ones, because defenders got through Koufos and his screen attempts too frequently. Koufos also doesnt screen and "open up" to the ball with any quickness, power, or force, instead he just kind of turns around and gawks at the ball. This is particularly a problem when you compare him as a screener to kids like Roy Hibbert and Kevin Love, who are both much better screen setters.

    As a passer, Koufos is also weak. He gets stripped alot, because he turns into traffic quite often, again showing the inability to even turn to his other side. All of his passes are completely right handed also, so the opponents are able to "trace the ball" on him much easier than almost any other player I have seen in a long time at this level. Koufos will always be a high turnover guy, because I don't view this is a likely correctable problem. Being able to pass with either hand is a talent and skill I look at in high school players wanting to play college ball, and in younger kids in their development, when I try and "project" them a few years down the road. By 19 or 20, with as much experience and coaching as Koufos has encountered, the fact this weakness still exists is troubling to me.

    It is difficult to evaluate Koufos as a decision maker yet, because the fundamentals of actually physically passing the ball effectively still havent been taught to him yet. I worry that will never be learned soon enough to help him survive.

    Defensively, Koufos was protected by Coach Thad Motta and his 90% use of a 2-3 zone. This enabled him to always see the ball, and to not have to move from the lane, which is a good thing, because I doubt Koufos has the ability to move well on the perimeter. He will likely be exposed at the next level in any scrren/roll situations, and will struggle to "close out" on shooters very far away from him. In this regard (closing out) the zone defense helped him in my view look better in college than he will be in the pros, because he basically always knew where the shooters would be specifically, that won't be as clear cut at the next level, and the upgrade in competition will likely be the difference between Koufos bothering a shooter, or being too late to matter.

    As a help defender, he isn't terrible, as long as he doesnt have to cover much ground. He has really good size, and unlike many centers born and bred in the U.S. culture, when he blocks shots he often keeps them in play rather than sending them into the 3rd row. Again, I think the zone employed very well tactically by Coach Motta makes him look better as a collegian than he will in the NBA, because he could play behind college centers inside and therefore didnt have to fight around them to get in position to recover and help.

    Since he won't ever be good enough in my opinion to play many minutes anyway, what he will likely do as a defender is just foul alot and put people on the line. For that reason, his defense won't be a giant liability in 2 or 3 minute bursts I suppose, but would be exposed if he played much longer than that.

    Basically what I am saying is (if you havent figured it out by now) is that I do not like Kosta Koufos and his game much at all. Even the things I think he does moderately well I don't think translate well to the NBA style of play, and he clearly isn't ready to contribute in my opinion for at least 2 years, and possibly much longer, IF he is able to greatly improve.

    Koufos looks like an end of bench guy to me at best, and probably more likely a Europlayer we'd see every few years in international competition. The best course of action for his career and for the team that drafts him is in my view to stash him overseas for a while and see if he greatly improves, because I right now I don't think he can play at all in the league.

    I know guys with his size always seem to hang around the league, bouncing from team to team and collecting checks, defying all logical reason. There are a million big slow white guys like Koufos I could compare him to, like Greg Kite, Greg Dreiling, Jack Haley, and last year's Chicago Bulls draft pick Aaron Gray. But I will go ahead and project Koufos as his closest comparison, to Indianapolis resident Stuart Gray, former 12th man for many NBA teams.

    In my view, picking Kosta Koufos would be a major major mistake for Indiana, unless it was purely for payroll purposes, so you could stash him overseas and wouldn't have to have him count against the cap. But in the first round, with the Pacers in dire need of immediate help, that type decision would be borderline criminal.

    And just to make this point even more clear, I didnt bother to include in this article just how poor a fit Koufos would be for both Coach O'Brien's up tempo offensive scheme, and his complicated, moving and shifting help defensive scheme.....it just seemed redundant and unnecessary to making my opinion clear on the Ohio State freshman, who I would deem a major mistake by the Pacers brass if selected.

    I know others may disagree, and I look forward to hearing people with a rosier and more positive outlook on a potential Pacer player. If drafted by us, I would of course hope to the heavens that my analysis could be in error.

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird

  • #2
    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

    Just to be clear. You don't like him as a Pacer? (grin)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

      The Pacers already drafted Koufos last year when they drafted Stanko Barac.
      What is the Pacers facination with un-athletic, white(ok I said it),slow, big men?
      The only one who panned out was Smits. That is not so good after 20 attempts.
      I think I might vomit in my mouth if Koufos is drafted.
      If you feel you have to do that go after Love or Lopez.
      If they are looking to trade down then go after Speights and Lawson.
      Maybe it is ruse to confuse other teams.
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
        Just to be clear. You don't like him as a Pacer? (grin)

        Yes my friend, I believe you could fairly say that I do not like Koufos as a player at all.

        I am hoping I will hear from people with different points of view on him, if any actually exist on here. When my evaluation is so far off from what it appears actual professionals think, it makes me question my own thoughts somewhat. Others apparently see much more in Koufos than I do....I just would like to know what it is that I may be missing.

        I look at Koufos and I see "stiff". Apparently, at least a few respected talent evaluators are seeing much more than that.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

          Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
          Yes my friend, I believe you could fairly say that I do not like Koufos as a player at all.

          I am hoping I will hear from people with different points of view on him, if any actually exist on here. When my evaluation is so far off from what it appears actual professionals think, it makes me question my own thoughts somewhat. Others apparently see much more in Koufos than I do....I just would like to know what it is that I may be missing.

          I look at Koufos and I see "stiff". Apparently, at least a few respected talent evaluators are seeing much more than that.
          They've thought the same things about other guys, and those guys have ended up being stiffs.

          You know my thread about 2s becoming point guards? Nobody who's a stiff in college ends up not being a stiff in the NBA.

          I don't doubt your analysis a bit.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

            Well then.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

              Koufos is just horrible. I would completely flip out if we wasted our pick on him.

              Let me put it this way; DJ White would be a better pick at #11 than Koufos. And I'm not even close to joking.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                This what scares me about Bird, we have 10 possible prospects who the Pacers should consider and they are working out this guy. If Bird picks up Kofus, then he and his secret agenda to find the next "Bird" can skip town.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                  He has no business being in this year's draft. Makes me question its overall quality.
                  You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                    tbird - don't we already have those players you described in the first post?
                    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                      The only reason I can see for then inviting Koufos is if they are planning on moving down
                      or at least being ready to make that move if someone offers them something they
                      cannot refuse.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                        Koufos is a solid player. He was a 5* recruit out of high school for a reason. No, he shouldn't be in this year's draft, but with some seasoning, I wouldn't be surprised if he became as good as Lopez.
                        Last edited by millertime90; 06-02-2008, 03:28 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                          Originally posted by millertime90 View Post
                          Koufos is a solid player. He was a 5* recruit out of high school for a reason. No, he shouldn't be in this year's draft, but with some seasoning, i wouldn't be surprised if he became as good as Lopez.
                          No, he's crap. I saw enough of him at OSU to say that confidently.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                            I think Koufos will be good in time. Remember, big men take a while to develop. From what I've seen of Koufos, there are a lot of tools to work with, especially offensively. He reminds me a lot of Mehmet Okur. Okur didn't look like much of anything with the Pistons (or at least I thought that way). However, with a few seasons of seasoning, he's now one of the better centers in the league with Utah.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Kosta Koufos

                              I don't know if Bird is smart enough for what I'm about to describe but here goes:

                              It only makes sense to work out everyone in our draft range so as not to hint to any other team who we might pick.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X