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

The Official "Fire Jim O'Brien!" Thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

    Originally posted by count55 View Post
    I agree, but I have far from a coach's eye for schemes.

    The thing I always liked about Harter's defenses in the past is that, while they had very, very strong team defensive principles, they were predicated on basically playing straight up. Each man needed to guard their man first and foremost, then they needed to understand what the situation was with their teammates and team as a whole.

    However, this team is definitely scrambling too much on defense. Take the play against Atlanta where Joe Johnson hit the three to put them up three. Quinn lambasted Marquis for leaving him, but Daniels had gone to guard the wide open (Horford) under the basket. Many, including me, felt he'd made the appropriate decision. The problem is that in watching the replays, I couldn't for the life of me figure out what they were trying to do, and who was really responsible for the breakdown. There were too many of them.

    I also think that this team too consistently sags on the weakside, resulting in constantly being torched on ball reversal.
    Exactly!

    Here is the thing. I you decide to pull a big over to the opposite block, NO MATTER WHAT. You are out of position as a team. It's math, if someone is guarding no one, then someone it open.

    Typically, in the recent past we were PUT out of position by very poor one on one defense. However you didn't play a SCHEME that is predicated on being out of position or not guarding someone. So, to me if your going to play this way, your saying "we feel like we can not guard our man one on one, so we are going to concede this and go strong side help, PREEMPTIVELY.

    A good point guard or player for that matter TRIES to get two guys to guard him so he can get it to the open guy for an open shot (on the elbow mostly, against this scheme). It seems simple to beat and being a life long point guard, it's the kind of thing you hope for!! Double team me so I can drop the easy dime.

    My point is this, in years past you had JO who, if anything we can agree about, is a shot blocker, this allowed for some of the "beat off the dribble mistakes" to be keep to a minimum.

    I dread when dunleavy comes back in this scheme because he'll draw charges galore, cuz he's smart and great at it, but it's still saying okay drive the lane. I worry about the tremendous physical pounding Dun will get in this scheme.

    Lastly, if Harter could have Mark Jackson and Chris Mullin not getting killed on defense, why in the world can they not do better than this with these guys. It's almost comical, if it wasn't so sad.

    At this point, I'd rather go back to individual accountability on Defense with helpside when absolutely needed. I think with this group (TJ and JJ), you can take away one of the historic horrible problems with accountability. What do you have to lose? I'm not saying put guys out on an island, but let's try to do something more traditional, because this SCHEME is getting worse by the moment.
    Last edited by Speed; 01-06-2009, 12:43 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

      Sure Harter's defense were about plkaying one on one defense, they rarely if ever doubled the post, but it was a very much a team defense. help and recover was the basis for the system. They played the exact same no matter who the opponent was - they defended the pick and roll the exact same......It was excution over scheming. This defense is similar in that regard - a lot of the principles are the same - but the zone rules allow flooded the strong side more

      But when the zone rules were changed 7 years ago or so defenses have changed and now most teams attempt to do what the Pacers current defense does - give up contested long two point shots and make the team pass the ball a few times.

      Sorry - I really had to rush through this - wish I could delve into this deeper - I love this stuff. (more fun thatn talking about whether JOB is the worst coach of all time or just bad)
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-06-2009, 01:18 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Sure Harter's defense were about plkaying one on one defense, they rarely if ever doubled the post, but it was a very much a team defense. They played the exact same no matter who the opponent was - they defended the pick and roll the exact same......

        But when the zone rules were changed 7 years ago or so defenses have changed and now most teams attempt to do what the Pacers current defense does - give up contested long two point shots and make the team pass the ball a few times.

        Sorry - I really had to rush through this
        No, I agree that it was very much a team defense.

        I miss the old illegal defense rules.

        Comment


        • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

          Has it been considered that maybe OBrien is not very good at scaling things to his personnel?

          I'm not making that claim, just throwing it out for some discussion....
          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


          • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

            The problem is that teams are hitting said long 2's because they're wide open.

            Comment


            • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              Has it been considered that maybe OBrien is not very good at scaling things to his personnel?

              I'm not making that claim, just throwing it out for some discussion....
              That's an interesting question, particularly defensively. I do know that our offensive pace factor the last two years (97.7 & 96.2) is higher than Obie's other full years (Bos - 92.5 & 90.9; Philly - 94.9). It should also be noted that his teams' Defensive Ratings were inversely related to their pace factor. That is, the 2003 team in Boston at 90.9 was ranked 5th, the 2002 team at 92.5 was ranked 7th, and the Philly team (94.9) was ranked 10th. Last year's Pacer team (97.7) was ranked 15th, and this year's (96.2) is ranked 18th. It would seem that faster the pace, the less effective his defense.

              Of course, there may be a fallacy in that discussion because it's based on three different franchises with three completely different sets of players.

              The other interesting thing I found with Obie's teams is that their offenses, for all the points they score, aren't particularly good. Last year's team was team was ranked 19th in Offensive Rating (Points per 100 possessions), and this year's is only 18th. This is not an anomaly, as his highest ranked full season was the 2003 Celtics, who were 17th. His other two full seasons (2002 Boston, 2005 Philly) were both 24th.

              I'm not entirely sure how to compare the teams, but if you look at the roster for the 2003 Celtics, his best defensive team, I don't see a ton of individual defensive skills there.

              Comment


              • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                Its gotten to the point that I'm fairly sure Obie and Bird have decided to tank. You simply don't make the decisions he does unless you plan on losing. I'm not saying that as an insult, just a fact. His decisions can only be explained by tanking.

                Now, as for whether or not he will be back. I think he will be. I hate him as a coach, but fricken Dunleavy game him a perfect excuse to a bad season. This off season will show me a lot about Bird. I love what Bird has done in the draft, but he is at all the home games, maybe away too I don't know. If he has payed attention to any of these games, I would hope he could look past the injury of Dunleavy and see the decisions Obie has been making. As a coach, Obie doesn't look to patch up the teams weaknesses, he simply tries to make our strong suit, stronger. Sadly, that still leaves us with a gaping hole somewhere else. In this case, our defense.

                Obie talks about defense a lot, but he doesn't coach it. I'm sick of hearing people say we don't have the players to be a good defensive team. Jack is a good defender at the PG position, Rush is a good defender, Daniels is a good defender, Granger is a good defender, Hibbert is a decent defender, Foster is a decent defender, McRoberts is a good defender, and so on. Now, I'm not saying we should have the best team defensively in the NBA, but it should be leagues better than what it is. His defensive rotations and sub patterns make no sense at all. He is an awful coach for this team.

                Comment


                • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                  Here are some thoughts/questions about the defense. I am willing to assume that the scheme works due to the past sucesses of O'Brien/Harter defenses.

                  - I think the players are overdoing the force the guy toward the baseline concept. I see this from all of our guards regularly. Instead of playing tough man defense, they slide too far toward the lane to force their man to drive baseline. The result is that they practically invite their man to penetrate which then starts the whole problematic rotation cycle. I'd much rather have them told, "Don't let your man drive, but if he does, push him toward the baseline."

                  - I think the rotational abilities of this team are severely limited by the lack of frontcourt athleticism. Rasho and Hibbert cannot be asked to rotate and switch, they're way too slow. Troy is better, but still not quick enough to pull it off. Foster, McRoberts, and Baston seem to be the only bigs we have who are quick/athletic enough to excel in this system. If you look at the defensive stats on 82games.com, you'll notice that our defense is markedly better with Foster and/or McRoberts on the floor (99.6 & 99.8 points/poss.) than it is with Murphy, Hibbert, or Nesterovic (who are all over 104 points/poss). In this respect, I do think the defense is very poorly matched with the personnel.

                  - Someone among our perimeter defenders is making mistakes and leaving guys open. I know it's hard to identify because of the constant rotation, but I know that the system is not designed to leave good shooters wide open. My hunch is that Marquis and Danny leave their men pretty regularly to try and make "plays" on defense (blocks for Danny, deflections and steals for Marquis).

                  - Ultimately, I don't know how we could tweak the defense to improve it. What worries me is that it seems to be getting worse. I can buy the argument that a team with a complex defensive system and 7 new players has a long way to come and won't be there by game 34, but we're seemingly worse now than we were at the beginning of the year, and that is bothersome to me. My hunch would be to tell our guards to more strongly deny any type of penetration, especially from the top of the key. It's fine to force a guy toward the baseline from the wing where he's going to wind up trapping himself, but from the top of the key or the free throw line extended, allowing penetration should really not be exceptable at all.

                  I'd love to hear some thoughts from all of you who are smarter than me about this.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

                    Last night's game is a perfect example of why I think JOb is a horrible coach. I know coaches can't make every decision for their players, and I know they can look at their bench and say there is no one else to put in for them so they have to leave some players on the floor, BUT........

                    When they battle back from such a big hole, and then you have JJack running down and shooting the ball with no offensive players under the basket with 4 Denver players back. If he was getting to the rim, then that's one thing, but pull up jumpers with 20secs left on the clock, and they aren't even ft range jumpers but just inside the 3pt line. That's horrible decision making, completely horrible.

                    Do we see JOb call a TO and rip into him? Do we see any type of correcting the behavior? No. They, the team, continually runs up and down the floor chucking the first open shot they see. Watching Jeff Foster shoot from the elbow, or further, makes me want to puke. And the sad thing is JOb encourages it.

                    It's obviously not as bad, but it gives me flash backs of Tinsley during the PHO game. He just stands there and watches the whole thing unfold, instead of letting them know that is unacceptable decision making.

                    I see the same mistakes, or horrible coaching philosophy that leads to horrible decisions, made game after game after game. It's god awful to watch and completely frustrating. They busted their asses off last night to get back into the game, then start getting shot happy. Say what you will about Rick's slow tempo offense, but I know if he was coaching and Anthony Carter was guarding Danny, DG would have saw the ball a hell of a lot more on the block to abuse him. Watching Carter slip through screen after screen and staying in Danny's jersey was comical. The term mismatch must completely be foreign to them.

                    I just don't see improvements, which is a lot like last year.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                      Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                      Here are some thoughts/questions about the defense. I am willing to assume that the scheme works due to the past sucesses of O'Brien/Harter defenses.

                      - I think the players are overdoing the force the guy toward the baseline concept. I see this from all of our guards regularly. Instead of playing tough man defense, they slide too far toward the lane to force their man to drive baseline. The result is that they practically invite their man to penetrate which then starts the whole problematic rotation cycle. I'd much rather have them told, "Don't let your man drive, but if he does, push him toward the baseline."
                      I think you're onto something here. It does seem that many times, their positioning seems "exaggerated".

                      Originally posted by mel
                      - I think the rotational abilities of this team are severely limited by the lack of frontcourt athleticism. Rasho and Hibbert cannot be asked to rotate and switch, they're way too slow. Troy is better, but still not quick enough to pull it off. Foster, McRoberts, and Baston seem to be the only bigs we have who are quick/athletic enough to excel in this system. If you look at the defensive stats on 82games.com, you'll notice that our defense is markedly better with Foster and/or McRoberts on the floor (99.6 & 99.8 points/poss.) than it is with Murphy, Hibbert, or Nesterovic (who are all over 104 points/poss). In this respect, I do think the defense is very poorly matched with the personnel.
                      I think it's a combination of lack of athleticism and lack of instinct, or feel. Both Foster and McRoberts have above average quickness for big guys, though I think Foster has better instincts.

                      As for Hibbert, I think a good deal of his mechanical movements come from overthinking the game. It seems to me that he can move with surprising fluidity at times, leading me to think that when he just relaxes and reacts, he's not too bad of an athlete, but stopping to think accentuates his athletic shortcomings.

                      I've said this umpteen times, but I haven't seen someone labor as much physically as Rasho does since Rik Smits' final year.

                      While it's likely a bad match for the personnel, it is also hampered by the fact that, whatever their assignments are, they don't seem to come naturally. The defense becomes a house of cards, and once someone misses an assignment, it's all over.

                      Originally posted by mel
                      - Someone among our perimeter defenders is making mistakes and leaving guys open. I know it's hard to identify because of the constant rotation, but I know that the system is not designed to leave good shooters wide open. My hunch is that Marquis and Danny leave their men pretty regularly to try and make "plays" on defense (blocks for Danny, deflections and steals for Marquis).
                      IMO, we ball-gawk too much. I don't know if this is by design or flaws with the individual players. In either case, the task falls to the coaching staff to fix it. If it's a flaw in the players' execution, they should constantly be harping on keeping track of both the ball and their man. If it's design, then it should be changed. We get burned too often away from the ball.

                      Originally posted by mel
                      - Ultimately, I don't know how we could tweak the defense to improve it. What worries me is that it seems to be getting worse. I can buy the argument that a team with a complex defensive system and 7 new players has a long way to come and won't be there by game 34, but we're seemingly worse now than we were at the beginning of the year, and that is bothersome to me. My hunch would be to tell our guards to more strongly deny any type of penetration, especially from the top of the key. It's fine to force a guy toward the baseline from the wing where he's going to wind up trapping himself, but from the top of the key or the free throw line extended, allowing penetration should really not be exceptable at all.

                      I'd love to hear some thoughts from all of you who are smarter than me about this.
                      I agree that the regression is a problem, but there are some factors that are contributing to this. With nagging injuries and illnesses, we have shuffled the lineups, with Ford, Murph, Quis, and Danny missing games. Brandon Rush has been erratic, which is to say he's a rookie, and we've used Stephen Graham from time to time, who is problematic defensively. Additionally, we've begun to work Roy into the game, and he is struggling with the defense, while Rasho, who lacks athleticism but is a smart player, appears to have died from the waist down.

                      Something has to be done, but it's difficult to see what the right thing is. Generally, the thought would be to slow the game down, but I can see good reason for hesitation here. I would hate to have to run a half court, set piece game with this personnel. Slowing the pace down may or may not make us a better defensive team, but I'm almost certain it will make us a worse offensive team.

                      Prior to last night's debacle, the previous 9 games had been decided by a combined 5 points. While it may not be right, it's not hard to see why somebody inside that situation might feel they're this close to breaking through.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Last night's game is a perfect example of why I think JOb is a horrible coach. I know coaches can't make every decision for their players, and I know they can look at their bench and say there is no one else to put in for them so they have to leave some players on the floor, BUT........

                        When they battle back from such a big hole, and then you have JJack running down and shooting the ball with no offensive players under the basket with 4 Denver players back. If he was getting to the rim, then that's one thing, but pull up jumpers with 20secs left on the clock, and they aren't even ft range jumpers but just inside the 3pt line. That's horrible decision making, completely horrible.

                        Do we see JOb call a TO and rip into him? Do we see any type of correcting the behavior? No. They, the team, continually runs up and down the floor chucking the first open shot they see. Watching Jeff Foster shoot from the elbow, or further, makes me want to puke. And the sad thing is JOb encourages it.

                        It's obviously not as bad, but it gives me flash backs of Tinsley during the PHO game. He just stands there and watches the whole thing unfold, instead of letting them know that is unacceptable decision making.

                        I see the same mistakes, or horrible coaching philosophy that leads to horrible decisions, made game after game after game. It's god awful to watch and completely frustrating. They busted their asses off last night to get back into the game, then start getting shot happy. Say what you will about Rick's slow tempo offense, but I know if he was coaching and Anthony Carter was guarding Danny, DG would have saw the ball a hell of a lot more on the block to abuse him. Watching Carter slip through screen after screen and staying in Danny's jersey was comical. The term mismatch must completely be foreign to them.

                        I just don't see improvements, which is a lot like last year.
                        Agreed. I always liked Carlisle, I do understand why we fired him though. But seriously, he was a good coach, he knew how to coach, he'd exploit every mismatch he could. O'Brien doesn't seem to adjust in games. He has his gameplan, and he sticks to it no matter what. Hibbert scores 12 points on 6-6 shooting with 2 rebounds and a block in 8 minutes, and O'Brien pulls him out. If he'd make the simple adjustment of leaving the hot players in, we'd be looking at more wins. Its gotten to the point that other teams announcers are seeing it. The other night against the Kings I believe it was.

                        "Man, I can't figure out what O'Brien is doing. Roy Hibbert was dominating us, and he pulled him out of the game. Then Jarrett Jack makes 3 shots in a row, O'Brien pulls him out of the game. Now Marquis Daniels starts lighting us up, and O'Brien can't wait to get him out of the game. I don't understand this at all."

                        That wasn't the exact words he said, but it was something a lot like that. For another teams announcer to notice this in 1 quarter shows how bad his rotations are. He needs to let players on a roll play, its that simple.

                        Comment


                        • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                          Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
                          Its gotten to the point that I'm fairly sure Obie and Bird have decided to tank. You simply don't make the decisions he does unless you plan on losing. I'm not saying that as an insult, just a fact. His decisions can only be explained by tanking.
                          I disagree - and I can explain everyone of his decisions and was trying to do so up untiul about 10 days ago when I was tired of doing so. But yes every decision he makes is reasonable - reasonab;le people can agree or disagree with. But no, tanking is not what is going on here. I am being very diplomatic in my response here
                          Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-06-2009, 04:38 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                            We should know soon enough if tanking is the intent. If, when Dunleavy returns, he plays less than the maximum number of games that leaves the Pacers able to have his salary for the season covered by insurance (which I am not certain how many games that would be, can someone help me out here?) prior to re-aggravating his knee condition (whatever it actually is with no real details being released about it through the media), it seems plausible that something fishy might be going on. If he surpasses that point in games played, we are nearly certain to be legitimately trying to make the playoffs and simply are failing to get the needed wins to get there for many reasons.

                            Comment


                            • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                              We should know soon enough if tanking is the intent. If, when Dunleavy returns, he plays less than the maximum number of games that leaves the Pacers able to have his salary for the season covered by insurance (which I am not certain how many games that would be, can someone help me out here?) prior to re-aggravating his knee condition (whatever it actually is with no real details being released about it through the media), it seems plausible that something fishy might be going on. If he surpasses that point in games played, we are nearly certain to be legitimately trying to make the playoffs and simply are failing to get the needed wins to get there for many reasons.
                              I do not have intimate knowledge of their insurance policy, but it is my understanding that insurance will only reimburse a team for salary in lost games if the player is forced to retire from injury.

                              Comment


                              • Re: When will Bird do something about O'brien?

                                Originally posted by count55 View Post
                                I do not have intimate knowledge of their insurance policy, but it is my understanding that insurance will only reimburse a team for salary in lost games if the player is forced to retire from injury.
                                Yeah, that sounds right. Assuming no hidden gotchas in the contracts we can't see, of course, but your understanding is the same as mine regarding general NBA policy.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X