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

Free Brandon Rush

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

  • #31
    Re: Free Brandon Rush

    Originally posted by Quis View Post
    Rush wasn't even that good in college, 13/5/2 on 43% shooting. I'm not sure why anyone thought such mediocre college production would translate to anything worth a damn in the
    NBA. He was a bottom-third of the first round talent, just like the mock drafts had him.
    IIRC I remember seeing several mocks projecting him to go late in the lottery. Could it be he is still getting over his ACL tear?

    All Im saying is while suffering through this "rebuilding year" why not let the young guys go through the growing pains now and not later?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Free Brandon Rush

      Originally posted by Quis View Post
      Yes, players who put up great numbers in college wont necessarily have the tools to do the same in the NBA. But that's now what we're talking about here.We're talking about a player who wasn't that productive in college. Why would someone who wasn't that productive in college translate to being anything better than "not that productive" in the NBA? We're not talking about a fresh-out-of-high school raw product. Brandon Rush was allegedly one of the most NBA-ready players in the draft and has been given ample opportunity to prove himself through the first 30 games and preseason. Thus far he's been a huge disappointment.
      Sporadic playing time through 30 games is not a sufficient sample size. NBA-Ready is a far too arbitrary for me to analyze, I believe its unfair to look at a player's production in a negative light because he was supposedly ready to make a quicker transition than others. What we are looking at is someone who is still quite raw, even with ample collegiate games. He is in the process of making the most difficult transition one can make. Whether or not the management is where it should be is another argument, but their choice was Brandon Rush. The Pacers will not make the playoffs, and for lack of a better expression, you have to see the forest through the trees. Sure, Graham can give you more productive minutes right now, and he has value off the bench in the future. But Rush is a potential starter, someone who has been deemed by the Pacers' franchise to one day be the starting shooting guard. Jerking his minutes around is a questionable way to get him to that point. The best way to analyze your draft choice is to play him. If his playing time doesn't deviate from what we have seen so far, there are more question marks going into next season. If you give him a lot of minutes, you are much further down the line with understanding how he will perform next year.
      It's understandable to want the player performing better in the game, but the only way to truly rebuild your team is to give your rookie's minutes and let them learn from their mistakes. I think O'Brien will do this, my main detraction is from what seems to be the consensus on this board, that Rush is a failure, and his high pick was not warranted. There is absolutely nothing substantial to that evaluation.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Free Brandon Rush

        Originally posted by Quis View Post
        Rush wasn't even that good in college, 13/5/2 on 43% shooting. I'm not sure why anyone thought such mediocre college production would translate to anything worth a damn in the
        NBA. He was a bottom-third of the first round talent, just like the mock drafts had him.

        There's something to be said about being the best player on a national championship team. Rush was the consumate team player during his senior season, often sacrificing his own stats for the good of the team.

        Rush clearly has the physical tools to be successful and has looked more agressive in his short tenure with Pacers than he ever did at Kansas. Once his shot starts falling he's gonna be a damn fine player. I've said it over and over again- great shooters (which Rush was in college) don't suddenly lose their shot. He is clearly in a slump.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Free Brandon Rush

          Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
          Don't laugh. Clearly, Rush has more potential than Graham (and probably more talent right now as well) but he's just not putting it together on the floor the way you'd want him too. I'd much rather see Rush than Graham right now, just because I think Rush has more room to improve, but he's not wrong. Graham is outplaying Rush in the minutes he gets.
          Not on defense.

          Rush is struggling with his shot and doesn't always maintain his confidence when things go south, but I still greatly prefer his one on one defensive skills.


          The bigger problem is this though - with no TJ Ford how do you spend a significant number of minutes with Jack at SG???? Seriously. WTF aren't you putting Rush on Kobe instead of flipping Jarrett Jack?

          Dumbfounding to say the least.


          As for "then he's earned it", screw that. At some point JOB has decided to commit to Roy and it's starting to show. Roy is learning to do a few things well while still stinking it up in other ways. Who cares, you gotta learn some time and I'd just as soon have that happen now vs later.

          But then it's the same thing with McRoberts. Every time he comes in he makes a huge block, rebound, pass, score, whatever it takes. Yes he gets some fouls and yes he's a little overall wild in his play, but not so much to come close to off-setting his physical positive impact for the Pacers.

          And yet off he goes to the bench most nights too, I guess to "earn it".


          There is no good reason that between Roy, Rasho, Troy, Jeff and McBob playing the 4-5 that you can't be finding 15 for Roy AND 6-10 for McBob from the 96 total. That's still giving you 70-75 minutes to split among 3 vets, 2 of whom definitely need to have low minutes nights from time to time (Jeff/Rasho) just to keep healthy. For the math challenged that still 30 for Troy and 20 each for the other 2 on average.


          But of course when you push small to a ridiculous degree even when 2 of your smalls are out (Ford, Daniels) then you are cutting out those minutes from the bigs.

          It would be different if Rasho and Troy were out and TJ/Quis were in and you were compenstating by going small. And I don't buy the speed/athletic thing either since McBob gets up and down as well as anyone on the team.


          I like Jack, I really do. But damn he is struggling, especially at the 2 spot and you've got other talent you can lean on right now. I have no problem that Graham is getting minutes ahead of Rush, but I do hate shortening up the PG spot to take time from Rush.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Free Brandon Rush

            Originally posted by iPACER View Post
            Not til he proves that he's better than Graham does Rush have a chance of seeing the floor...

            Has to earn it.

            Then he knows he deserves it and can play like it.
            If you really had to earn playing time McRoberts would not be getting DNPs while Rasho and Foster play tons of minutes.
            "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

            -Lance Stephenson

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Free Brandon Rush

              You know another guy I wouldn't want touching the ball - GRANGER. I mean the dude sucked from deep his rookie year so clearly he needed bench time in year 2 to learn how to "earn it".

              But then they just made him a starter and his prima donna attitude has carried on while his shooting has only got worse.




              Oh wait, you mean we aren't going to debate in fantasyland? Seemed like that was the direction this whole "what has Rush done" or "look at his college stats" was taking.

              Rooks DEVELOP. Cripes, Graham damn sure should be ahead of Rush right now, he's had the experience to be there. IMO the issue is with people who totally misread Rush's college game or didn't watch him play. He made guys like Arthur and Chalmers better, he was the best help defender KS had, and he had the best awareness factor on the court.

              He's learning NBA moves and NBA systems right now and 100% identical to Granger's early career he's overthinking because that's the type of player he is. Frankly so is Roy. That's why I like them both so much because like Danny we can expect more growth than the average player shows because they are smart enough to continue learning for many years after entering the league.

              Sorry they aren't stars now, but neither was Danny his first season. DG hasn't just gotten better, he's also improved RELATIVE TO HIS OWN DRAFT CLASS. Think about that, he's kept moving up while other guys plateaued or dropped off. That's the way we should be looking at Rush and Roy.

              And PT along the way shouldn't hurt them any more than it did Granger.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Free Brandon Rush

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Not on defense.

                Rush is struggling with his shot and doesn't always maintain his confidence when things go south, but I still greatly prefer his one on one defensive skills.


                The bigger problem is this though - with no TJ Ford how do you spend a significant number of minutes with Jack at SG???? Seriously. WTF aren't you putting Rush on Kobe instead of flipping Jarrett Jack?

                Dumbfounding to say the least.

                Kobe owned Rush. I'm probably the second biggest Rush supporter on this board, but Brandon had no place on the floor against Kobe.


                I know the circumstances are different, but Rush's regression reminds me a lot of what happened to Shawne Williams last year. He was playing reasonably well and got benched for reasons I still don't understand. And while I fully expect Brandon to respond well (Shawne never did), his poor play has actually gotten to a point where it's more valuable to have Stephen Graham on the floor, even defensively.

                I've seen a lot of players recently get very physical when Rush is guarding them. He seems to be intimidated, and I think O'Brien said something to the effect of Rush needed to use his size and strength to become a more consistent physical defender.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Free Brandon Rush

                  We spent a number 11 pick (essentially) on Brandon Rush. You have to let rookies develop. Graham has very little value to this franchise, and is easily replaceable. If you don't intend to develop Rush then you wasted a draft pick plain and simple. Rookies struggle, they learn to get better by playing through it.

                  Also what has Rush ever done to show us he will develop some sense of entitlement?

                  If the Pacers were battling for a top 4 playoff spot, and you truly think that Graham gives you the better chance to win then yeah go with that. However, that is simply not the case. This is a borderline playoff team at best.
                  We can replace Stephen Graham, easily. He doesn't do anything particularly well, and just about every team in the NBA has a player like him. That's not to say Rush is some sort of prodigy, but we did use a lottery pick to get him, and just that means he should be getting Graham's PT. If Rush never works out, we can go get another Graham.


                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Free Brandon Rush

                    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                    Kobe owned Rush. I'm probably the second biggest Rush supporter on this board, but Brandon had no place on the floor against Kobe.
                    If Jack or Graham had even a modicum of success in his place I could agree with your point, but as Quinn even pointed out all Kobe had to do on Jack was dribble to the lane and shoot right over him, rinse repeat.

                    So at that point why not at least let Rush have the run at him if all 3 guys are going to do jack squat in that role. Plus if we are talking about Rush's shooting and then having Jack play SG...um, yikes. Oh-fer was the theme of the night for JJ.

                    The only thing Graham was able to do was come down and score back against Kobe, which at some point got Kobe ticked off and going at him harder.

                    The main debate IMO is Jack vs Rush because bottom line that's the choice that was being made last night and I didn't see anything that made me feel Jack vs Kobe was working in any possible way. That was a pretty bad situation for the Pacers all night.


                    I will defend Graham on one thing, he does do something extremely well and that's leaping at the rim. The dude is an awesome dunker, very explosive and he can make even good defenders come up cold if they let him get in that range. He's also got at times a really nice jumper. He has value and makes a nice bench piece, someone that can come in and solve a specific problem (offense going to the rim).

                    I don't dislike him anymore than I disliked John Long for playing ahead of Reggie Miller in his first season. But you still got Reggie in the game.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Free Brandon Rush

                      Originally posted by Indy View Post
                      Graham has very little value to this franchise, and is easily replaceable.
                      Look, Graham's getting his PT at SF. Rush isn't losing minutes to Graham, he's losing them to Jack. So these Rush/Graham comparisons are silly.

                      That said, anybody who want to play for the Pacers and is a developing talent has value to the franchise. As Nap said, Graham could develop into a very nice bench player. I'm certainly in no hurry to get rid of him, and I don't begrudge him the minutes he's gotten.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Free Brandon Rush

                        All the minutes that Foster and Rasho are playing is what irks me the most.
                        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                        -Lance Stephenson

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Free Brandon Rush

                          MPG wise, Foster is getting 25, Rasho 22, and Hibbert 13. Jack is at 30, Daniels 33, and Rush at 23. The Pacers have the 2nd worse record in the East, only ahead of Washington, with a .361 winning percentage. They will not make the playoffs. This team is rebuilding and needs to act accordingly. Rush and Hibbert especially need to see their minutes increased. Its nice to see the team win, but in the long run getting these two players more minutes will assure a brighter future for this franchise. Rasho is gone at the end of the season, Daniels and Jack may be as well. These three logging a lot of minutes is not an optimal situation. The team is trying to eek out wins to appease themselves and the fan base. I personally would like to see the young guys given larger roles. It hurts to see the Pacers lose, and you have to play every game to win, but I think O'Brien can get this done while setting the Pacers up for next season, where they will have a better chance at being a factor in the playoff race. And when the Pacers have their lottery pick, the same situation will rear its head next year.
                          If O'Brien is a worthwhile coach, he can incorporate more minutes for the rookies while still putting the Pacers in a position to win games.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Free Brandon Rush

                            Rush was a better choice than Jack because at the very least, Rush has the length to contest/bother Kobe's shot. Maybe Kobe baits him into a foul.......okay.......how is that worse than letting Kobe shoot what amounts to an uncontested jumper over Jack? For Jack to be asked to guard Kobe one-on-one with no help with the game on the line.....wow.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Free Brandon Rush

                              Originally posted by MiaDragon View Post
                              Graham couldn’t sniff the floor last year but NOW its time to see what he has, I dont get it....
                              Its very simple, Rush is underperforming and Graham is more productive on the floor. Rush is more talented and has more potential, but is not putting it together at this time. He is not benched, however, and is still getting out there for 10 minutes or so every game. The fact of the matter is we have a better chance of winning with Graham out there more than rush... right now...

                              Rush will play more minutes when he shows that he deserves them. It is as simple as that. Throwing rush out there over graham to get minutes he doesn't deserve hurts the team concept and chemistry. Stephan is earning his minutes, he deserves them at the present time. I don't understand the complaining, Graham has played well.

                              as for the other issue, I hope rush is the defensive guy in a season or two... but putting a rookie on kobe is an automatic foul. Late in the game or not.
                              Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 01-11-2009, 02:38 AM.
                              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                              - ilive4sports

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Free Brandon Rush

                                Originally posted by Big Smooth View Post
                                Rush was a better choice than Jack because at the very least, Rush has the length to contest/bother Kobe's shot. Maybe Kobe baits him into a foul.......okay.......how is that worse than letting Kobe shoot what amounts to an uncontested jumper over Jack? For Jack to be asked to guard Kobe one-on-one with no help with the game on the line.....wow.
                                Jack did a pretty decent job contesting that shot, and Kobe hits that exact shot on, well, everyone. It doesn't really matter whos gaurding him. I don't think this arguement holds any water. You always want him shooting that shot over putting him on the line. better than uncontested free throws that he hits at like a 90% rate.
                                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                                - ilive4sports

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X