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

Two Observations - One O, One D

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

  • Two Observations - One O, One D

    Well, OK, two observations other than the Hawks game was a matter of "who sucks least"...

    OFFENSE: I tried very hard to watch the ball and player movement tonight to figure out why our shooting is so abysmal.

    I think I understand - we have no decent passers.

    Passes end up either above the shoulders, at the knees, or to the side at 3/4 arm length. All of these mean that there is no chance the shooter can get the ball in rhythm.

    Trying to force a rhythm, leads to missed shots. Trying to decide what else to do with the ball leads to challenged passes and shots because the defense gets in position.

    I begin to think that this tarnishes our PG abilities (though they are still head and shoulders above having an injured one). It also explains why Diener adds so much to the game - he has the ability to get a pass to the player in the right place. Unfortunately, by the time he is in the game, we've already lost our rhythm completely and it is hard to recover.

    When Travis is at full health, I'd not be averse to having him start a game or two to see what happens when they get in rhythm early.


    DEFENSE: An element of JOB's defense that has always been controversial has been his desire to defend the paint 100% at the cost of defending the perimeter. Early in the season, we seemed to have a handle on keeping the perimeter covered even while denying the lane. Recently, though (epitomized by the horrible decision to leave Joe Johnson wide open at the 3), we've fallen into the habit of playing position (get into or back into the lane on defense) rather than player. I saw more defenders turn and run away from the ball handler tonight than I have all season, all in the name of stopping a drive or pass but all resulting in an open shot.

    Is the team so concerned about playing help defense that they are losing sight of their own man? If so, is this coaching or player problems?
    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...

  • #2
    Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    DEFENSE: An element of JOB's defense that has always been controversial has been his desire to defend the paint 100% at the cost of defending the perimeter. Early in the season, we seemed to have a handle on keeping the perimeter covered even while denying the lane. Recently, though (epitomized by the horrible decision to leave Joe Johnson wide open at the 3), we've fallen into the habit of playing position (get into or back into the lane on defense) rather than player. I saw more defenders turn and run away from the ball handler tonight than I have all season, all in the name of stopping a drive or pass but all resulting in an open shot.

    Is the team so concerned about playing help defense that they are losing sight of their own man? If so, is this coaching or player problems?
    I wondered about this when that Johnson three sequence happened. Quinn suggested Johnson should not have been left. Yet in the replay it was clear that had Quis not dropped down, Atlanta would have had a player wide open under the rim.

    So what is he supposed to do there? Leave a guy open for a potential layup or remain high and outside to cover Johnson?
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

      one big obeservation i have is that if this team learned how to finish around the rim the record would be a lot better....not saying defense isnt important but thats always mentioned....i cringe everytime hibbert tries to lay the ball in....instead of slamming the ball down.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

        Hopefully Mike will help with the passing problem. In fact, I think the offense will look much better when he's back if he's healthy.

        Defensively, if it's true that they are almost playing a zone in the name of help D in the paint, then the obvious suggestion seems to be to just go to a more traditional man to man defense and help less often.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

          Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
          I wondered about this when that Johnson three sequence happened. Quinn suggested Johnson should not have been left. Yet in the replay it was clear that had Quis not dropped down, Atlanta would have had a player wide open under the rim.

          So what is he supposed to do there? Leave a guy open for a potential layup or remain high and outside to cover Johnson?
          Quis did precisely the right thing. I have no idea what Quinn was talking about and scratching my head as he was saying it. I suppose he would rather we lost on a uncontested dunk by Horford than an uncontested shot 23 feet from the hoop by Joe. Given how accurate and unflinchingly savvy Joe is, there was probably about an equal 100% chance they were both gonna be makes, but, still, you always would take a team having to make a three in that situation.

          And given how nice the pass was from Josh Smith, there was really no time to rotate (or really any expectation of a need to rotate) by Danny/Rush/whoever was near the top of the key. So it was purely the defensive failure of (I believe) Foster to stop Josh Smith's penetration that forced Murph to rotate to stop his layup and, thus, forced Quis to rotate down to the block that led to the wide-open, back-breaking trey by Joe.

          Quis done good.
          Last edited by JayRedd; 12-30-2008, 11:56 PM.
          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

            every time you would give up the uncontested 3 point than the open shot under the bucket.
            Haggard's Blog: Can't Buy a Basket. Covering the highs and lows of the NBL

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Well, OK, two observations other than the Hawks game was a matter of "who sucks least"...

              OFFENSE: I tried very hard to watch the ball and player movement tonight to figure out why our shooting is so abysmal.

              I think I understand - we have no decent passers.

              Passes end up either above the shoulders, at the knees, or to the side at 3/4 arm length. All of these mean that there is no chance the shooter can get the ball in rhythm.

              Trying to force a rhythm, leads to missed shots. Trying to decide what else to do with the ball leads to challenged passes and shots because the defense gets in position.

              I begin to think that this tarnishes our PG abilities (though they are still head and shoulders above having an injured one). It also explains why Diener adds so much to the game - he has the ability to get a pass to the player in the right place. Unfortunately, by the time he is in the game, we've already lost our rhythm completely and it is hard to recover.

              When Travis is at full health, I'd not be averse to having him start a game or two to see what happens when they get in rhythm early.


              DEFENSE: An element of JOB's defense that has always been controversial has been his desire to defend the paint 100% at the cost of defending the perimeter. Early in the season, we seemed to have a handle on keeping the perimeter covered even while denying the lane. Recently, though (epitomized by the horrible decision to leave Joe Johnson wide open at the 3), we've fallen into the habit of playing position (get into or back into the lane on defense) rather than player. I saw more defenders turn and run away from the ball handler tonight than I have all season, all in the name of stopping a drive or pass but all resulting in an open shot.

              Is the team so concerned about playing help defense that they are losing sight of their own man? If so, is this coaching or player problems?

              If I'd only watched tonight, I'd come up with a similar opinion on passing, but tonight was an anomaly. I'd make the argument that we're one of the top 5 passing teams in the league, and in my opinion they're #2 behind Utah.

              Our entire offense is based on crisp passes from the high post, which we neglected tonight. 50.3% of our made baskets this year have come from within 3ft of the basket. Without a low post presence, a percentage that high should tell you how good our passing is (and we're ranked #3 in apg). Rasho is a great passer, Troy and Jeff are above average, and our backcourt usually hits players in rhythm, particularly on fast breaks.


              That being said, Travis easily has a spot in our rotation (without Dunleavy), which I was afraid to say during the preseason. He certainly solves any offensive stagnation and is our best decision-maker in the backcourt.


              Defensively, tonight may have been our worst game of the season. If Atlanta hadn't been ice cold early, they would've scored 130. Most of those misses were great looks.

              I think this is a player problem, but O'Brien blamed himself in the post-game, saying he's not doing a good job of coaching this since they practice rotations every day and aren't executing during games.
              Last edited by imawhat; 12-31-2008, 01:01 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                Just a quick note here.

                The defensive rotations are exactly why I have been b!tching all season long about the short rotations.

                It's not just about up tempo offense, it is that our guys get no break on the defensive end either. To do this correctly each player will shuttle off of his man generally once per possesion. Thus everyone is supposed to shift as well.

                All of this constant movement, as well as a desire to push the offensive tempo, will put wear and tear on our players in particular our big players. Ever wonder why O'Brien likes to go small? Well the small guys usually don't wear down as fast as the big guys do.

                I say all of that to say this.

                Our defense would be better if you had

                a. better players
                b. more athletic players
                c. more energy players
                d. all of the above

                Obviously the answer is D., however inserting an energy player into the mix for a few min. a game couldn't hurt either. For that matter inserting Uncle Buck or myself into the game wouldn't have a worse result (a loss is a loss afterall).

                The fact that McBob is getting DNP-CD, after the games he had, is just astounding.

                When I look at Rasho who has already lost 3 streps since the season began and I see Foster wincing every now and then, I just have to wonder why oh why does he not play?

                I am sure we would hear long intellectual diatribes about missed spots on defense or not knowing the plays.

                The results are the same, losing.

                However, IMO, this is more dangerous because you are wearing down players who you really can not afford to wear down for the end of the year just in case some miracle happens and we do make a move to the playoffs.


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

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                  Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                  Quis did precisely the right thing. I have no idea what Quinn was talking about and scratching my head as he was saying it. I suppose he would rather we lost on a uncontested dunk by Horford than an uncontested shot 23 feet from the hoop by Joe. Given how accurate and unflinchingly savvy Joe is, there was probably about an equal 100% chance they were both gonna be makes, but, still, you always would take a team having to make a three in that situation.

                  And given how nice the pass was from Josh Smith, there was really no time to rotate (or really any expectation of a need to rotate) by Danny/Rush/whoever was near the top of the key. So it was purely the defensive failure of (I believe) Foster to stop Josh Smith's penetration that forced Murph to rotate to stop his layup and, thus, forced Quis to rotate down to the block that led to the wide-open, back-breaking trey by Joe.

                  Quis done good.
                  This was my thought, too, obviously. I absolutely could not believe what I was hearing QB say on the broadcast.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                    Originally posted by ThA HoyA View Post
                    one big obeservation i have is that if this team learned how to finish around the rim the record would be a lot better....not saying defense isnt important but thats always mentioned....i cringe everytime hibbert tries to lay the ball in....instead of slamming the ball down.
                    I wanted to give this one a big AMEN!

                    Roy, you're the center. You're big, you're long. If you have the ball around the rim, DUNK IT! And dunk it hard. Not only will it go in, you'll get fouled. Both are good things. I hope I never see you shoot a lay-up again. EVER.

                    Also, I know you can pass, but if you get the ball inside the "charge" circle, you better be taking the shot. Bang once with your body, pivot, and dunk. Easy points, man.

                    And don't get me started on your rebounding. Or lack thereof. Last night you made Smits look like a great rebounder. At least a couple would fall into his hands a game. Don't give me a story about Foster and Murphy taking them from you. Smits had Dale taking boards from him.
                    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                    - Jimmy Buffett

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                      Originally posted by Doug View Post
                      I wanted to give this one a big AMEN!

                      Roy, you're the center. You're big, you're long. If you have the ball around the rim, DUNK IT! And dunk it hard. Not only will it go in, you'll get fouled. Both are good things. I hope I never see you shoot a lay-up again. EVER.

                      Also, I know you can pass, but if you get the ball inside the "charge" circle, you better be taking the shot. Bang once with your body, pivot, and dunk. Easy points, man.

                      And don't get me started on your rebounding. Or lack thereof. Last night you made Smits look like a great rebounder. At least a couple would fall into his hands a game. Don't give me a story about Foster and Murphy taking them from you. Smits had Dale taking boards from him.
                      Fair points. I think he'll get there. He is a rookie after all, and I don't think he looks any more timid than Smits did in his first couple of years.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                        No doubt in my mind that the offense runs better with Travis running the point - put simply, he keeps the ball moving than either TJ or Jack.

                        Last night as JOB explained after the game, the defensive rotations were horrible last night. There is a common misperception about JOB's defensive system. Yes he wants to defend the paint first and foremost, but after that he doesn't want to give up any open threes. He wants to give up contested long two point shots on the weakside - make the opponent pass the ball around, maybe get a deflection

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Yes he wants to defend the paint first and foremost, but after that he doesn't want to give up any open threes. He wants to give up contested long two point shots on the weakside - make the opponent pass the ball around, maybe get a deflection
                          Yes, that's the object, but if you don't have the personnel to complete both goals you sacrifice the secondary (forcing contested long twos) in favor of the primary (stopping the drive to the basket).

                          When you can't manage to contest the long 2, opponents start turning it into the short 3.
                          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


                          • #14
                            Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                            I think the passing problem, while partially just plain old PG issues, stems mostly from the strategy which is heavily player decision based and on the fly. There are pieces you can string together to create a play as I see it, and definitely guys like Foster, Murphy, Quis and to a lesser extent Danny are able to handle it. Often you'll see a series of 2 man games strung together to create a "play", and these typically get you those looks at the rim (just had another Jeff to Troy last night in fact).

                            But Jack, Rush, Roy and maybe even TJ aren't handling it well, and I think Danny also struggles with this part. What you get is these guys out on the perimeter having to stop and think about what to do next and by the time they see it so does the defense. You get very telegraphed passes or you get the mid-air junk from Jack or you get the wildly off-target stuff you mentioned in your first post.


                            There are 2 sides to the improv coin. It's great to let players read and react, it's tougher to scout and plan against. BUT there is a lot to be said to running a set of plays so well that it doesn't matter if the defense knows what's coming. This was the Reggie baseline screens into wing curl catch and shoot. We saw it 500 times a season, but it just kept working. And part of that was that the screens were dead on, the curl was tight and precise and the pass would always be right on the money and right on time.

                            I've always fallen on the side of a strong playbook over "freedom" or read/react offenses, and this is a big reason why I always defended Rick and still like him as a coach.

                            Fair points. I think he'll get there. He is a rookie after all, and I don't think he looks any more timid than Smits did in his first couple of years.
                            I agree, though he just may be a worse rebounder than Rik. I mean there was one play where it went out on Atlanta and the only reason for this was that 2 Hawks lept well above Roy and then lost control of it themselves. This despite the ball coming right down to him. Troy is three times the atheltic leaper that Roy is.

                            Also as I worried in the prospect thread, Roy's just slow and it hurts him getting the ball in the post as well as finishing it in a hurry when needed. Roy has strengths and if you set the game up to be a bit more deliberate he can take advantage of guys. But I've already decided that I'm going to have to plan on hunkering down for a long wait on Roy's game.

                            I like him, especially for a #17, but right now he's going to have to play and it's going to be bad.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-01-2009, 04:46 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Two Observations - One O, One D

                              McBob - I agree. It's just dumb now. If he's not being a major a'hole at practice then his not playing 5-10 per game makes zero sense. It's got nothing to do with tanking, giving up or just forcing development.

                              He's shown he can have some pretty positive impact on games and the other bigs have shown that the season is starting to kick them in the rear.


                              Originally posted by JR
                              I have no idea what Quinn was talking about and scratching my head as he was saying it.
                              I have this moment 2-3 times every single game he does color on. This is nothing new. I think he makes half of it up after the fact based on the results.

                              Quis played Joe as well as possible and was a big reason why Joe struggled early on. He forced Joe away from his comfort moves and stayed tight on him coming off screens. In contrast Rush, the guy I love, got stonewalled on screens far too often and ended up letting Joe get loose and then create havoc whether it was for his own shot or someone else.


                              When Travis is at full health, I'd not be averse to having him start a game or two to see what happens when they get in rhythm early.
                              Seeing how things have gone lately I'm inclined to agree here. It's not that he hit timely 3s, it's that he seems to grasp his role in this offense better.

                              In fairness in the post-game thread I said the guys that seemed to understand things the best were Foster, Quis, Granger, Troy and Diener. What do they all have in common that the rest of the team doesn't? This isn't their first season with JOB coaching them.
                              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-01-2009, 04:59 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X