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

EARL CLARK

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

  • #46
    Re: EARL CLARK

    It's striking that he keeps saying...

    That's how I live my life...Let's move on.
    Last edited by count55; 06-03-2009, 02:16 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: EARL CLARK

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      Of course, the impressive thing in that clip is the amazing pass by Twill. Very few NBA players at any position could make that pass.
      It is a heck of a pass.
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: EARL CLARK

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        Of course, the impressive thing in that clip is the amazing pass by Twill. Very few NBA players at any position could make that pass.
        Damn....that was a really good pass.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: EARL CLARK

          W/O a chance at Griffen, & behind only Evans, Holiday & maybe Curry I'm not sure there is a player I think could help us more, or that I would want more in this draft.
          I too worry about him reaching his potential, but @ #13 he likely has the most potential of anyone we could hope for. I don't see him being a "bust" w/ that body & skill set, and the upside is awful tempting to think about.
          "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
          (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: EARL CLARK

            SLAMonline Mock Draft: Earl Clark, No. 13

            Indiana needs this tough guy who does it all.

            by DeMarco Williams

            http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba...k-draft-no-13/

            With the 13th pick in the 2009 SLAMonline Mock Draft, the Indiana Pacers select…

            Earl Clark. Drafting players is a lot like meeting a girl on Match.com. Sure, you’ve peeped 10 great pictures of the mystery lady online repeatedly, but until you see her standing at the Cheesecake Factory hostess desk for the first time, you’re not really sure what to expect. Earl Clark, the ridiculously-athletic forward who did Louisville’s dirty work while Terrence Williams was getting the ESPN highlights, is, well, the Pacers’ date for next season.

            Indiana finished 36-46 a year ago. In one conference, that record would have been cause for panic. In the other, it’s just another way of saying your team was only one player away from a 6th seed in the playoffs. Thankfully for the Pacers, they play in the latter conference.

            Danny Granger, the NBA’s most improved player, was the main reason Indiana came thiiiis close to making the postseason. The two-headed PG of TJ Ford and Jarrett Jack kept things in motion. Troy Murphy manned the middle respectably. And when they weren’t at the doctor’s office, the MDs, Mike Dunleavy Jr. and Marquis Daniels, were a headache for the opposition.

            The Pacers have potential at every position. Unfortunately for hoops fans in the Hoosier State, they rarely showed it consistently. A do-it-all like Clark would be a heaven send. At 6-10, Clark is long enough to mix it up inside with Murph and Roy Hibbert on occasions, but he’s more than ball hungry enough to help Grange and Dunleavy during any offensive lulls. Lest we forget, Clark led the loaded Louisville Cardinals in scoring last season.The kid simply adores the hoop.

            Of course, Indiana’s problem isn’t really with putting the ball in the hole. It’s actually with preventing others from having their way with the scoreboard. Squads averaged 106 ppg versus the Pacers. That’s 5th worst in the League. They gave up 115 or more 21 times. While Clark would be the first –Wait, actually Cardinals coach Rick Pitino might be first- to tell you he needs some work with his defensive fundamentals, things like a growing physique (228 pounds and expanding), a crazy wingspan, sound footwork and a knack for the big block and rebound only make learning that much easier.

            Still, the essential point with the Pacers is that they aren’t missing much. Somebody like Clark, a genuinely decent kid with more upside than Facebook in ‘07, can come in, learn his role (hustle, tussle and bust on you) and thrive for Coach Jim O’Brien. There are some who say Wake Forest’s James Johnson could have done the same things. Maybe so. But this whole draft thing is like meeting a virtual crush in person for the first time. Might as well go with the one who appeared the most promising in the pictures.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: EARL CLARK

              Originally posted by billbradley View Post
              SLAMonline Mock Draft: Earl Clark, No. 13

              Indiana needs this tough guy who does it all.

              by DeMarco Williams

              http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba...k-draft-no-13/

              With the 13th pick in the 2009 SLAMonline Mock Draft, the Indiana Pacers select…

              Earl Clark. Drafting players is a lot like meeting a girl on Match.com. Sure, you’ve peeped 10 great pictures of the mystery lady online repeatedly, but until you see her standing at the Cheesecake Factory hostess desk for the first time, you’re not really sure what to expect. Earl Clark, the ridiculously-athletic forward who did Louisville’s dirty work while Terrence Williams was getting the ESPN highlights, is, well, the Pacers’ date for next season.

              Indiana finished 36-46 a year ago. In one conference, that record would have been cause for panic. In the other, it’s just another way of saying your team was only one player away from a 6th seed in the playoffs. Thankfully for the Pacers, they play in the latter conference.

              Danny Granger, the NBA’s most improved player, was the main reason Indiana came thiiiis close to making the postseason. The two-headed PG of TJ Ford and Jarrett Jack kept things in motion. Troy Murphy manned the middle respectably. And when they weren’t at the doctor’s office, the MDs, Mike Dunleavy Jr. and Marquis Daniels, were a headache for the opposition.

              The Pacers have potential at every position. Unfortunately for hoops fans in the Hoosier State, they rarely showed it consistently. A do-it-all like Clark would be a heaven send. At 6-10, Clark is long enough to mix it up inside with Murph and Roy Hibbert on occasions, but he’s more than ball hungry enough to help Grange and Dunleavy during any offensive lulls. Lest we forget, Clark led the loaded Louisville Cardinals in scoring last season.The kid simply adores the hoop.

              Of course, Indiana’s problem isn’t really with putting the ball in the hole. It’s actually with preventing others from having their way with the scoreboard. Squads averaged 106 ppg versus the Pacers. That’s 5th worst in the League. They gave up 115 or more 21 times. While Clark would be the first –Wait, actually Cardinals coach Rick Pitino might be first- to tell you he needs some work with his defensive fundamentals, things like a growing physique (228 pounds and expanding), a crazy wingspan, sound footwork and a knack for the big block and rebound only make learning that much easier.

              Still, the essential point with the Pacers is that they aren’t missing much. Somebody like Clark, a genuinely decent kid with more upside than Facebook in ‘07, can come in, learn his role (hustle, tussle and bust on you) and thrive for Coach Jim O’Brien. There are some who say Wake Forest’s James Johnson could have done the same things. Maybe so. But this whole draft thing is like meeting a virtual crush in person for the first time. Might as well go with the one who appeared the most promising in the pictures.


              I honestly think this kid's our guy.
              Passion, Pride, Playoffs, Pacers

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: EARL CLARK

                Here's the thing we have one side saying, "Clark has issues maintaining focus and motivation." then we have another saying "These accusations are not based in reality."

                Part of me, due to the fact that we heard the same two sided debate after the Williams pick, says where there is smoke there is fire, and that we should stay away. The other part of me says that you're gonna kick yourself if you miss out on a good talent because of that fear. Tough choice to make. If Clark is there at 13 and we are KEEPING the pick, I think it could be likely that he is our guy.


                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: EARL CLARK

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  Here's the thing we have one side saying, "Clark has issues maintaining focus and motivation." then we have another saying "These accusations are not based in reality."

                  Part of me, due to the fact that we heard the same two sided debate after the Williams pick, says where there is smoke there is fire, and that we should stay away. The other part of me says that you're gonna kick yourself if you miss out on a good talent because of that fear. Tough choice to make. If Clark is there at 13 and we are KEEPING the pick, I think it could be likely that he is our guy.
                  I can completely ignore the "motivation" questions and ask a more important question:

                  Is Clark going to be a good fit for us given what we know he is already capable of ( not what he can "potentially" become )?

                  From what I have read about him....he has the skillset to be a SF in the NBA with the cavaet that he could POTENTIALLY BECOME ( and that's the key ) a PF/Frontcourt Player.

                  Because I'm a pessimist and thinks that we must draft/aquire NBA Ready Players that are not only ready to contribute and ( hopefully ) fills a need....I'd prefer not to draft a Tweener that is more of a SF then he is a PF ( as opposed to one that is more of a PF then he is a SF ).

                  Unless it appears that he doesn't have too much work on to transition his offensive/defensive skills into becoming the Low-Post Scorer/Defender on the NBA Level ( which doesn't appear to be the case ) that we are looking for.....based off of what we have seen from what he has done in College, he doesn't appear to be a consistent Low-Post scorer/threat ( given his preference to take jumpshots ).

                  This doesn't mean that I think that he is not capable of developing and/or model his offensive/defensive game into a PF ....I'm just saying that I am entirely convinced that he can become the type of PF that we are looking for ( given time that we do not have ) based off of what he did in College ( given his preference to take jumpshots ). That amount of "uncertainty" is enough for me to pass on Clark....assuming that players like Henderson, TWill or Lawson ( while moving Ford ) are available.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: EARL CLARK

                    1. Is Earl Clark like Rashard Lewis?

                    2. If so, does he need to be next to a Dwight Howard?

                    3. Is Roy our Dwight?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: EARL CLARK

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      I can completely ignore the "motivation" questions and ask a more important question:

                      Is Clark going to be a good fit for us given what we know he is already capable of ( not what he can "potentially" become )?

                      From what I have read about him....he has the skillset to be a SF in the NBA with the cavaet that he could POTENTIALLY BECOME ( and that's the key ) a PF/Frontcourt Player.

                      Because I'm a pessimist and thinks that we must draft/aquire NBA Ready Players that are not only ready to contribute and ( hopefully ) fills a need....I'd prefer not to draft a Tweener that is more of a SF then he is a PF ( as opposed to one that is more of a PF then he is a SF ).

                      Unless it appears that he doesn't have too much work on to transition his offensive/defensive skills into becoming the Low-Post Scorer/Defender on the NBA Level ( which doesn't appear to be the case ) that we are looking for.....based off of what we have seen from what he has done in College, he doesn't appear to be a consistent Low-Post scorer/threat ( given his preference to take jumpshots ).

                      This doesn't mean that I think that he is not capable of developing and/or model his offensive/defensive game into a PF ....I'm just saying that I am entirely convinced that he can become the type of PF that we are looking for ( given time that we do not have ) based off of what he did in College ( given his preference to take jumpshots ). That amount of "uncertainty" is enough for me to pass on Clark....assuming that players like Henderson, TWill or Lawson ( while moving Ford ) are available.
                      I get this, but let me counter:
                      At 6'10" & 225#, & a frame to add weight, I think he can be a PF. We play a style that will use his skills to do different things then a proto-typical PF might in other systems. He will never be a Dale Davis type, but I think the Lamar Odom comparison is quite accurate. While many will argue that LO has never lived up to his potential, if we could get what Odom is @ 13, in a weak draft, I'll take it.
                      Also, being a "tweener" is not always so bad. Lamar Odom himself is a "tweener". I would put him in a "Good-Tweener" catagory. While maybe not night-in/ night-out the most ideal player/ fit at his position, his ability to move, guard multible positions & streatch defenses creates more positive mis-matches then he gives back. Other players, like a Austin Croshere, was a "Bad-Tweener". AC's skill set is more of a SG, but body & speed was a 3 or a 4. While he was a nice player in spots, he was never a player who could hold down/ start at any position consistently. Any advantage he gave at one position, he gave right back on the other. I do not see Clark having that problem as a 3 or a 4.
                      With Murph peeking, & only having 2 yrs left on his deal, this would be a great time to add the "next" PF to this team. Again, I am not saying Clark is/ should be "Our Guy", but I think we could do far worse.
                      Last edited by PacerGuy; 06-03-2009, 11:12 PM.
                      "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                      (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: EARL CLARK

                        I don't get the "tweener" thing, honestly. The issue is that he's got the skills of a SF and the body of a PF? Because 6'10" doesn't sounds "tweener" to me. Sure, he's light, but he'll add weight as he adds years. 20 pounds doesn't sound unreasonable, which would make him 6'10", 245. That's plenty.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: EARL CLARK

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          I don't get the "tweener" thing, honestly. The issue is that he's got the skills of a SF and the body of a PF? Because 6'10" doesn't sounds "tweener" to me. Sure, he's light, but he'll add weight as he adds years. 20 pounds doesn't sound unreasonable, which would make him 6'10", 245. That's plenty.
                          BINGO!
                          That was the figure I was gonna use, but left off my post.
                          I think 20# is reasonable (& probable), & with his shot blocking & quickness, he could be scarry!
                          "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                          (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: EARL CLARK

                            Originally posted by PacerGuy View Post
                            I think 20# is reasonable (& probable), & with his shot blocking & quickness, he could be scary!
                            Well in fairness, adding 20 pounds most likely means he loses some quickness. And right now it doesn't look like he has "big man skills" i.e., a post game, footwork, post defense, etc. Somebody who saw more of him could probably comment on that. So you maybe worry that he doesn't have the skills to play the 4 in the NBA.

                            But it's hard to see him not having the body.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: EARL CLARK

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Well in fairness, adding 20 pounds most likely means he loses some quickness. And right now it doesn't look like he has "big man skills" i.e., a post game, footwork, post defense, etc. Somebody who saw more of him could probably comment on that. So you maybe worry that he doesn't have the skills to play the 4 in the NBA.

                              But it's hard to see him not having the body.
                              Fair enough, I get that, but also get that unlike a big who might have to try & develope his agility & skills, EC will bring those physical tools with him already. It is much easier to take a smaller guy, add weight, & teach technique then it is to take a big & try & develope the skill set. Kinda like it is easier to take a corner in football, add weight, to become a safety, then it is to take a linebacker, lose weight & try & teach coverage & add speed. I will admit that the body must be one that can be transformed in either case, & I think we both agree that Clark has the frame to be either/ both.
                              "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                              (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: EARL CLARK

                                What weakness in this team does Earl Clark improve? People talk about him needing to be told what to do all the time like it's endearing or something? The kid is obviously a tweener with a low basketball IQ who vanishes for long stretches with a questionable work ethic. Sounds like Shawne Williams part deux to me. No thanks. This team needs to get tougher, rather have TWill personally.
                                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X