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

Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

    One of cable television's highest rated shows stars Kyra Sedgwick, the actress wife of Kevin Bacon, as a detective working for Los Angeles Police Department as head of what they call their Priority Homicide Division. The entire plot of the show is that she was brought in to finish difficult cases that LAPD couldn't seem to get finished.....the name of the show is, appropriately, "The Closer."

    While I'm not recommending we bring a Hollywood actress to help run our franchise, I do think our Pacers are in desperate, more than any team in the league perhaps, would be helped by obtaining a "closer"....someone who gets the job done, regardless of how it may look or feel.

    To be clear, I'm not talking about a "closer" in an offensive sense, as it is usually referred to in basketball. I am instead referring to our inability to stop teams from scoring, particularly in crunch time, but in reality all throughout the game. Consider some following stats:

    The Pacers are 10-19 as I currently write this. As of now, the are I believe the 4th or 5th worst field goal percentage defense in the league, and while I havent looked it up lately, we also foul I think more than most teams in the league, giving up more foul shots by far than the average NBA team, with the usual exception of Utah.

    In spite of that, in those 19 losses, we have had the lead in the 4th quarter a staggering 12 times! In addition to that, I believe we have been within 1 possession during the final 3 minutes 8 of those losses, and have been (by my unofficial count) ahead 5 different times in the last 20 seconds, only to see our opponents score baskets at the end of games to either win or send games into overtime, where we have also been pitiful. Someone else can list all the specific games, but off the top of my head at midnight on a Saturday night I can think of the Boston game (Ray Allen hits a three), the Charlotte game at home (Ray Felton sends it into overtime) and the New Jersey game this week (Devin Harris scores at the buzzer). I know there have been a few more....after a while, it becomes hard to keep track.

    Our lack of ability to make any team in the league struggle offensively, no matter how poor they may be, is the single biggest factor in my view of why we aren't 16-13, or 14-15, or somewhere much better than we currently are at least. Coming from a coaching perspective, our defense is so abysmal at times that it makes us difficult to watch, even when we win a shootout against a fellow doormat such as Golden State this week.

    I believe the time has come to at least start to ask some difficult questions of ourselves, to our Pacers, and to our fellow fans. As I see it, the defensive problems at their core can be boiled down to three central elements: Effort, scheme, and talent. This thread will attempt to hit all three topics, and hopefully create some quality discussion.

    I'll discuss effort first.

    The popular thing I read or hear from casual fans, and sometimes on here, is that the Pacers are downtrodden, but at least we are happy with the effort they are giving. I know it makes us feel better to think that and verbalize it, but isn't this just damning with faint praise?

    I expected and demanded effort from my teams in my coaching days, and I expect it from my employees and myself everyday. I am sure most of you experience those feelings everyday too at your jobs. Giving your best, your maximum effort, as a professional athlete is not only expected, it should be a given. I no longer will give our Pacers a pass for incredibly bad or stupid play defensively just because of the shadow word of "hustle" or "effort". That is a staple, not a bonus plan....nothing for me to be excited about anymore, and you shouldn't lower your expectations of success just because your team seems to "hustle", if they are completely unsuccessful while doing so!

    Everyone, and me included until now, has been over-rating our team's hustle and effort anyway, I guess because it makes us feel better about things, I don't know. But effort has to come from the mental side too, and if our "effort" was truly so great then we should be seeing at least some marginal improvement collectively by now. We aren't seeing that, in fact I think we are regressing defensively.

    Praising effort can be a cop out for fans to say something nice about bad teams. Here in Bloomington, you often here about the IU fans (of which I am one and proud of it) praise this years team for always hustling and "playing hard". People say that, but they don't know what it really means at times. You see a player hustle after a loose ball or just get to help side in time to take a charge, and everybody says "great effort!". Well, it isn't always great effort, in fact it is often because the player was late and out of position to start with, thereby creating a driving lane...if the player on defense truly was demonstrating "great effort", he would have been in the right place to begin with, and the drive may never have been attempted.

    My bottom line is this: Playing hard or semi hard most nights isn't good enough for me. My standards are higher than that, and our team should be better defensively than it is. We don't improve, we don't get tougher, we don't get physical, and lately, we don't seem all that bothered as a team or as fans even when our defense becomes more and more porous. In fact, there is a certain human nature that wants us to just accept it for what it is....but acceptance of failure is, well, unacceptable!

    Maybe its just the late hour, our my cranky mood, but our Pacers are starting to just roll over and accept the losing I am afraid, and I'm afraid it is happening here too among us. Realism is one thing, but accepting mediocre effort and results is something else. No more lip service to playing tougher defense guys, either get the job done, or we will find someone else who will.....that is the type of message I am longing to hear someone say on the coaching staff.

    That is a good lead-in to my next discussion point, which is our defensive scheme, and the ability of our coaches to get it to work.

    I hear people say often that our scheme is similar to what Boston runs. Well, I am a coach/scout by trade, and I breakdown teams on film at the high school level alot. Either we are trying to do something more complex than Boston that to me is unidentifiable, or we just completely stink at doing what the coaches are attempting to install. Regardless, something will need to change from a coaching standpoint defensively, because we are beyond porous.

    Our perimeter guys, especially it seems to me our point guards although they arent the only culprits, are still getting beat WAY to easily and too often off the dribble. This is causing our alreadly slow and weak inside guys to have to overreact and help too much, and our complicated rotations out of help are way too slow, and therefore we give up easy jumpers uncontested way too often.

    Other problems exist too of course. Our screen/roll defensive scheme has cost us at least 2 games at the end I can think of (Boston game and one more I can't remember), when our big man INEXPLICABLY, when helping "hedge" on the ballhandler/shooter, LEFT THE BALL TOO SOON to rotate back to his man (before the original defender was in position) and gave up an open three point shot to beat us eventually. In the Boston game at Conseco, it was Jeff Foster (a vet who should know better) who left RAY FREAKIN ALLEN alone at the top of the circle with the Pacers ahead 3. Allen of course nailed the three ahead of a flailing attempt by a too late Marquis Daniels, and the Pacers lost eventually.

    We are not "tied together" very well defensively. Do you want something to watch in a Pacer game to prove this? One of the keys to man to man defense that is successful is the theory of "jumping to the ball". That is the principle of when the opponent makes a pass, that all 5 of your defenders should slide toward the ball one slide, in a defensive stance, reacting as one force to help stop the shot. I cannot tell you how much a typical high school team in this state that is well taught practices that....it is an old fundamental. Some coaches (including yours truly) have tied the defenisve players together by rope even, FORCING them to move as one in help position. The oldest defensive drill in the world is the "4 man shell drill".....and the Pacers look like they've never heard of it. Watch how the Pacers weakside defenders do not all react jointly to a pass, and you'll see what I mean.

    You know what? Maybe our scheme is too complicated for our players, because maybe we have the dumbest players in the league. This is a defensive thread I know, but how many times will Jarrett Jack need to leave his feet with no where to pass and turn it over in the last 2 minutes to learn not to do that? How many times will we leave a great shooter wide open at crunch time when we leave the basketball for no reason? For a professional basketball team full of players who have played their entire lives preparing for these moments, we make a ton of silly mistakes.

    Which leads me to a lack of talent. Obviously, we lack some in this area. But again, I've always told my teams that intelligence and heart and effort can make you a quality defensive team. But in reality even I know that heart and "want to" can only take you so far. We badly need an influx of defensive individual talent...... our seemingly shoddy scheme might look a little better if we didn't have such dopes trying to execute it perhaps.

    We need several new pieces to be a good defensive team in the future. I go back and forth about what order we need them with this group, but I'll stick with my normal philosophy I think and put them in this order:

    1. An elite wing defender to guard the opponents best player so Granger doesnt have to. I know everyone is semi happy with Marquis Daniels and his offensive contributions, but in reality he is a sieve at times. Granger is a nice shot blocker and I think does play more physically like I like defensively, but we still need a bookend to play next to him.

    2. We badly need a physical, strong enforcer inside....a Dale Davis type player who can intimidate physically. The Pacers have the softest bigs in the league as we know. Taking charges is nice, and our bigs do it well, but if we had better defenders on the perimeter and an enforcer inside to punish drivers, maybe teams wouldnt just dunk on us with impunity like they do now. Maybe an intimidator would keep teams from wanting to drive in the first place, especially if we committed some hard fouls! In reality, we may need a couple of guys like this....and they aren't as easy to come by as you would hope.

    3. I had higher hopes for the Ford/Jack combo as a defensive pairing. Jack in particular is getting exposed at times when playing the point, and I may be the only one, but I absolutely despise playing these 2 players together. I think playing them together, combined with our already soft as charmin front line, makes us the pansiest team in the NBA. I need further study about these 2 players defensively to see if them in combination can play the position defensively the way I want. If I decide not, I may be pushing to draft a point guard in June, when back in October I would never have though that.

    Speaking of the draft, there is a distinct lack of anyone I consider a superior wing defender in the draft, with the possible exception of Earl Clark from Louisville...and he is iffy to me as a potential lockdown defender. I see no real "tough guy" big power forwards either, other than Blake Griffin who I think will be an outstanding pro, an all NBA level player eventually. Other than him I don't see a tough guy who has the other skills to play next to Roy Hibbert in the future, so Larry is going to have to be creative I think to fill these holes with players already in the league I think. I like Thabeet from UCONN alot as a center anchor of defense so far, but I question whether he and Hibbert could play together, and I'm not willing to write off Roy yet at all, and in reality all those players will likely be gone by our eventual pick anyway. I think we likely will need to go the free agent route, using our MLE, or creative sign and trades.

    One potential answer I think is the Lakers Trevor Ariza, who I think we should make priority number one for next summer. He is an unrestricted free agent, is likely to leave LA for a starting spot and more money, and most teams will be saving up for the summer of 2010. We will have money coming off the books in Daniels and Nesterovic, so he should be affordable, and he makes a ton of sense. No reason I can't start the drumbeat now for him, so some of you can watch him play the rest of the season with a closer eye and give us your opinions on him. I think he is perfect for one of the pieces we need to become a great defensive team.

    I am very concerned about the team style and identity we are seemingly going for, or at least that Jim O'Brien is going for. I think we are soft, weak, play too small, and play too.....immature?....gutless?....wimpy? I don't know what word I would describe us now, but what I envision us being is tough, physically strong, intimidating, smart, enthusiastic.....and "relentless". I hate to quote Isiah, but he once said in his tenure that we "need some dogs". I agree with that....we need some junkyard dogs in here!

    How much help would it be, for instance, to have a player like a Paul Milsap, or Trevor Ariza (I view him as a perimeter guard dog), or to go back in the past, a player like Rick Mahorn or Dale Davis? I think it could help a ton, and it is the direction that we need to go. I envision us as being the toughest, hardest to play against, most physical team in the league, not some pansy collection of jump shooters who play matador defense and try to outscore you.

    Regardless of what players are here and how we play, I am and will always remain a loyal fan....after all, that is what I am and what I do, and I am sure many of you can relate. But my loyality doesnt need to be blind, and it doesnt mean I can't question things.

    Larry Bird: it's time to start acquiring some players who can be athletic and mentally and physically tough enough to defend with pride, and who would rather bleed and cause blood to flow than give up a drive or a jump shot.

    Jim O'Brien: it's time to quit paying lip service to defense, and to actually start demanding it be played well and played correctly. It's time to quit worrying about protecting your job, and to start doing your job! It's time to either get the players to buy in, to simplify your scheme, or to coach it and teach it better. It's time to get your assistant coaches involved, and perhaps to its time to quit being so stubborn offensively and to use your offense to help hide your swiss cheese defense.

    Players: it's time to quit blaming injuries, youth, inexperience, and all the other crap excuses that the media in our town and the fans and staff may give you. It's time to suck it up and take some individual pride in stopping someone. it is time to study harder, scout better, play with even more effort and tenacity, it is time to concentrate, be more determined, and to be tougher. It's time to quit making excuses, and to start making plays that can win ballgames on the defensive end.

    Fans: it's time to start holding people accountable for their play, and to raise our expectations above where they are now. We are starting to become enablers by accepting passively terrible play, and sometimes poor effort. We need to start being more demanding of this team, and not just lay back and accept our fate.

    In fact, I think that is the key word: Accountability. It is time we had some regarding this team's performance, starting right now. The business side is solid now, and we have good citizens and people. All that is awesome, but I expect alot more from my favorite team than having a group of solid citizens who get their butts kicked every night.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 12-28-2008, 06:39 AM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick



    I don't know what to add other than that. I whole-heartedly agree.

    -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

    • #3
      Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

      [Kristen Wiig]CONFEEEESSSS!!![/Kristen Wiig]

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

        Wait. Why do we need a wing defender? How is that a concern when Rush-Granger are our starting wings of the future?

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

          I like the fact that this post is coming from T-bird. It will garner more attention than if I had somehow come up with it. I'm also happy that you didn't mangle it with all of that boring technical speak you usually bombard us with . It's a pretty sound assessment of this team, this board and those who call the Pacers their team. I'd really like to see T-bird & UB have a civilized discussion on the current state of the defense from coaching/scheme/players etc...
          I'm in these bands
          The Humans
          Dr. Goldfoot
          The Bar Brawlers
          ME

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

            TBird, long but interesting read....at least the parts that I skimmed through. Regarding the running our "Team Defense", something that I thought can be effective but requires that ALL 5 Players be in absolute sync in order for it to work....I have 4 questions.

            1 ) Doesn't acquiring or drafting a Player with a High Basketball IQ....a clear requirement for a Player to properly fit into the Offense and ( most notably ) Defense....limit the # of Players that we should be interested?

            Sure, we can look for some athletic freak that can rebound and block shots like Stromile Swift or tried to go after a perimeter defender like Mickael Pietrus....but both are known to be "dumb as rocks" when it comes to Basketball IQ...so they wouldn't really fit the Team. I have always been under the impression that one of the reasons ( other then being the most NBA-Ready ) why we went after Hibbert ( a smarter more fundamentally sound but clearly not the most athletic Player in the draft ) as opposed to someone like JaVale McGee or Jason Thompson ( both Players that can be considered more offensively and athletically gifted ) was due to Hibbert's high Basketball IQ....one of the requirements of Players that I thought that we have to have for anyone on our team....not only to understand how they fit into the offense but ( most notably ) the Team Defense concept. I'm not diminishing the benefits of having Players with a high Basketball IQ.....cuz I would much rather have a smart Basketball Player as opposed to a stupid one.....but it would seem that the # of options that we would have to improve our team would be limited.

            2 ) Do you think that we run too much of a complex defensive system for Players to properly implement?

            This goes back to the notion of having Players with High Basketball IQs. Not only does our offense seem to require Players that are Athletic to properly excel in the Offensive and Defensive end....but it requires them to have the smarts to properly implement the defense since the whole notion of Team Defense hinges on everyone doing everything right in order for it to work. This was one of the reasons why I suspect that Diogu was moved.....he was a pure Low-Post scorer ( something that we lack now )...but couldn't grasp the Team Defense and therefore never fit JO'Bs team.

            3 ) Given the players that we have, basically a team with pourous perimeter defense and soft interior defenders, are we running the right type of defense?

            From what I have seen of this team so far, I get the impression that we can go one of 2 ways......wait til next season to try to address the 2 problems that you mention ( acquire/draft a wing defender and interior defensive presense ) and stick with the same defensive system that we run OR completely scrap the Team Defense concept and change our Defensive system to one that may fit the likely 8-9 Players that we will have in our primary rotation for the next 2-3 seasons.

            4 ) Since you appear to be much smarter then me when it comes to Basketball matters, do we actually run a similiar type of defense that the Celtics run?

            You ( as well as others in the past ) brought up the notion that "in theory" the Pacers defense is similiar "in nature" to Boston's defense. Obviously, the Celtics defense is the best in the league while ours is one of the worst. I don't see the similiarity.....with the obvious difference in the pace of the offense ( which I understand can affect the defense ).

            As for our Wing Defenders, you touch AGAIN on something that we have discussed before.......in the previous offseason, we both agreed that we needed to pursue a Player like Quiton Ross.....a roleplaying Guard lockdown type perimeter Defender. After seeing how Ariza harassed, hounded and shutdown Granger in the 4th QTR of the most recent Pacer/Laker game.....I couldn't agree more that IF we have to pursue a Wing Defender in the 2009 Offseason that we should try to make a run for him. There is a reason why top Lockdown defenders are locked down for 3 or 4 year contracts....every team needs one and once they get one...they are locked up for $3-5 mil a year type contracts. Anyone know if Ariza is a Restricted or Unrestricted FA for the Lakers?
            Last edited by CableKC; 12-28-2008, 02:58 AM.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

              Originally posted by rexnom View Post
              Wait. Why do we need a wing defender? How is that a concern when Rush-Granger are our starting wings of the future?
              I am not as high on Rush as several on this board are, although I think potentially he could develop into a fine NBA player and potential starting level player.

              But, in my mind, he projects to be a 6th-7th man type....sort of a well-rounded supersub who can do multiple things well but who doesn't have one super-skill. He projects to me, in an ideal setting, to be a James Posey level player......a key member of the rotation, first or second sub off the bench for a really good team.

              Tbird

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                I didn't realize Trevor Ariza was so young, he's in his 4th year in the league and he's only 23.

                "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                  I am all about Ariza and have been for a while. He's a lockdown wing in waiting. LA absolutely fleeced Orlando IMO in the deal where they acquired him. Rush and Granger are or will be good defenders, but not great defenders. Ariza has a chance to reach that level.

                  I also agree with disappointment at the PG so far. Of course it's better than Tins, but their defense is less than I'd imagined and they both have TO/decision making issues, Jack's lately coming at the most inopportune times.

                  As I've grown more disillusioned with the absolute lack of defense as the season has progressed, I have begun to wonder about scheme and coaching. This is a complaint/critique that many here suggested last season, as well. So, apparently, it has not been resolved.

                  However, given our glaring deficiency in defensive talent, what type of overhaul or scheme change can maximize our play?

                  I do like the fact that the team consistently plays hard. On the other hand, your point about players focusing their effort, taking responsibility, increasing team play, etc. so that the effort becomes more high quality is on target. The base effort has been consistent but the quality of effort (or how it translates into actual performance) seems to be dropping off.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                    Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post

                    Our lack of ability to make any team in the league struggle offensively, no matter how poor they may be, is the single biggest factor in my view of why we aren't 16-13, or 14-15, or somewhere much better than we currently are at least. Coming from a coaching perspective, our defense is so abysmal at times that it makes us difficult to watch, even when we win a shootout against a fellow doormat such as Golden State this week.
                    I agree with you that (from the games I've seen at least) our defense is really, really bad. Defense at PG is an especially large issue. Maybe I'm acting as the antithesis of everything that you're posting, but it really doesn't bother me an incredible amount this year because we're still growing so much as a team. Our team is made up almost exclusively of new players who haven't played a lot together and I'm willing to give the abysmal defense a pass until January, where I'm really hoping that we show at least some improvement. If it stays this bad or gets worse throughout this year though, I will become more concerned.

                    The popular thing I read or hear from casual fans, and sometimes on here, is that the Pacers are downtrodden, but at least we are happy with the effort they are giving. I know it makes us feel better to think that and verbalize it, but isn't this just damning with faint praise?
                    Not really. As a team we are deficient when it comes to talent and we are an underdog almost every night. We're just removed from the brawl and subsequent PR mistakes that totally decapitated this franchise. It's going to take time for the Pacers to become the Pacers again. We're a traditionally good franchise and I know we'll get there again. But like Portland's rise back to respectability, it's going to take some time.


                    Maybe its just the late hour, our my cranky mood, but our Pacers are starting to just roll over and accept the losing I am afraid, and I'm afraid it is happening here too among us.
                    It is not possible for a fan to "roll over and accept losing" while also acknowledging the effort and hustle that a team puts in night in and night out, especially a talent deficient team. If Brandon Rush comes off a screen perfectly but misses the jump shot, I acknowledge his effort for getting in position to make the shot but my acknowledgment comes with the future expectation that he will hit that shot most of the time. But since he is a rookie, I am willing to give him a pass and applaud his effort. BUT THAT ONLY COMES WITH EXPECTATION OF FUTURE RESULTS.

                    Realism is one thing, but accepting mediocre effort and results is something else. No more lip service to playing tougher defense guys, either get the job done, or we will find someone else who will.....that is the type of message I am longing to hear someone say on the coaching staff.
                    I really think we will. You truly don't think this team is a finished product, do you?

                    As for your Ariza talk, well, good luck with that. Phil Jackson isn't going to take anyone on this roster for Ariza, LA is really high on him right now. Ariza was a pretty unsung player in Orlando and we're going to have to do something similar in plucking a good defensive player off of another team's bench.

                    I think Rush will be a very good defender on the NBA level. Of course, I don't get to watch every Pacer game, but he looked great (most of the time) guarding Caron Butler in the Washington game this year.
                    Last edited by idioteque; 12-28-2008, 01:49 PM.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                      Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                      I agree with you that (from the games I've seen at least) our defense is really, really bad. Defense at PG is an especially large issue. Maybe I'm acting as the antithesis of everything that you're posting, but it really doesn't bother me an incredible amount this year because we're still growing so much as a team. Our team is made up almost exclusively of new players who haven't played a lot together and I'm willing to give the abysmal defense a pass until January, where I'm really hoping that we show at least some improvement. If it stays this bad or gets worse throughout this year though, I will become more concerned.

                      Not really. As a team we are deficient when it comes to talent and we are an underdog almost every night. We're just removed from the brawl and subsequent PR mistakes that totally decapitated this franchise. It's going to take time for the Pacers to become the Pacers again. We're a traditionally good franchise and I know we'll get there again. But like Portland's rise back to respectability, it's going to take some time.


                      It is not possible for a fan to "roll over and accept losing" while also acknowledging the effort and hustle that a team puts in night in and night out, especially a talent deficient team. If Brandon Rush comes off a screen perfectly but misses the jump shot, I acknowledge his effort for getting in position to make the shot but my acknowledgment comes with the future expectation that he will hit that shot most of the time. But since he is a rookie, I am willing to give him a pass and applaud his effort. BUT THAT ONLY COMES WITH EXPECTATION OF FUTURE RESULTS.

                      I really think we will. You truly don't think this team is a finished product, do you?

                      As for your Ariza talk, well, good luck with that. Phil Jackson isn't going to take anyone on this roster for Ariza, LA is really high on him right now. Ariza was a pretty unsung player in Orlando and we're going to have to do something similar in plucking a good defensive player off of another team's bench.

                      I think Rush will be a very good defender on the NBA level. Of course, I don't get to watch every Pacer game, but he looked great (most of the time) guarding Caron Butler in the Washington game this year.
                      I very much agree with this post.


                      (RE: Ariza - He will be an Unrestricted Free Agent next summer, but he would be wise to stay with LA.)
                      Last edited by count55; 12-28-2008, 02:19 PM.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                        Truly enjoyable post to read, especially in regards to what I have been saying as of late... lack of "D" with a coach who has a shootout mentality who isn't getting his job done as the teacher when it comes to getting his team to playing "D". He's all lip service about playing "D" with no substance in getting it done.

                        I truly believe T-Bird hit the nail on the head about so many fans are willing to accept low expectations and standards with this team giving a 1,001 excuses why the Pacers aren't/shouldn't be better.

                        Am I the only one that thought T-Bird came just short of saying that JO'B wasn't getting the job done as a coach with the players he has and with the system he's trying to instill, and that maybe another coach was needed?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          I very much agree with this post.


                          (RE: Ariza - He will be an Unrestricted Free Agent next summer, but he would be wise to stay with LA.)

                          Absolutely, he has a great chance of winning 1 or more championships there. What's he got a chance of winning with the Pacers? A few playoff games?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                            He might come if he's looking to be a bigger piece of a team.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Searching for Kyra Sedgwick

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              Absolutely, he has a great chance of winning 1 or more championships there. What's he got a chance of winning with the Pacers? A few playoff games?
                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              He might come if he's looking to be a bigger piece of a team.
                              Well, what I meant was that he was in a perfect situation: a good team where he can just be an athlete. If he take a bigger contract or goes to a team where he will be expected to be the key defensive stopper or a starter, odds are he turns that he will not enjoy anywhere the personal success he has with no expectations being placed on him.

                              I have to wonder if he's not a bad contract waiting to happen.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X