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

Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

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

  • Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

    The major topics on this board recently (and almost always) seem to be:

    1. How good are the Pacers?
    2. Do they care about defense?
    3. What the heck is JOB's offense doing?
    4. Why is / isn't Player X playing?

    The opinions on the board, of course, represent the full spectrum of answers...from the highly insightful 'What defense?" and "We suck" analyses to actual attempts to analyze the pick-and-roll defense...from "all we do is jack up threes" to "I have no idea what we were trying to do there"...from "go with the small line-up," and "Luther Head should start" to 'small ball is an abomination" or "JOB loves Troy and will play him no matter that he is the worst defensive player on the team," or "Roy is being ruined by not starting."

    OK, maybe that's not a full spectrum of opinion, but it is pretty much the spectrum I've been reading here lately.

    I posted a comment / question in the Eight Points, Nine Seconds blog post-game analysis of the recent loss to the Macericks. I said:

    .....maybe I missed it, but I didn’t hear anyone say we need to take it to the basket more, and quit settling, or immediately choosing, the long jump shot. They should say that. They should do that. But I don’t hear any comments that tell me they’re even thinking about it. Would that thought be against some JOB philosophy? Do we have to make the 3s drop first, then we can attack the basket? But not until then?

    Tim Donahue, our Count55, took the trouble to post a rather lengthy reply (much appreciated), in which he said that, contrary to popular opinion at PD, he felt that the great majority of JOB's focus was the defense. Here's the link:
    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.co...gile/#comments

    It made me want to do a little analysis of JOB's approach to basketball and coaching, and to see how it is actually playing out with our team in the early days of the current season. I am not the basketball analyst that many on this board are, but I can read, so I went looking for quotes past and present to try to clarify our current state of affairs, and JOB's thoughts. I've tried to organize these by topic, and by chronology (oldest to newest) within the topic areas. Obviously, these are not all the quotes that exist, but I think they fairly represent JOB's views within each topic.

    Defense:

    Eric Matz (Indianapolis): In your previous NBA coaching stints, which season do you feel, personally, you did the best job, and why?

    Jim O'Brien: It's a good question, I think we had fairly solid years each time I was a head coach, but my first full year with the Celtics was probably the best, when we went from 27th in the league in FG defense to third and not only did we make the playoffs after a long drought, but we won two playoff series where we were probably underdogs in both series. We grew alot in one year, so that would probably make that our best year.
    -- http://www.nba.com/pacers/chat/obrien_070613.html

    "He tells us the offensive end is ours, the defensive end is his," O'Neal said. "We have to play the way he wants us to play [defensively]."

    (article removed) http://www.philly.com/dailynews/spor...ldnt_stay.html

    "It is kind of complex," says Pacers associate head coach Lester Conner. "Take the pick and roll: When we are defending the pick and roll, it's not just two guys defending it; the whole team has responsibility."

    "Some of the things we do here are contrary to other [teams'] defenses," explained O'Brien. "It took time to pick it up in Boston. It took time to pick it up in Philadelphia. Once they get it, they will learn to trust each other -- and they will get it."
    -- http://www.fannation.com/blogs/post/...obriens-system

    Offense:

    Jim O'Brien: There are a number of things. No. 1 is to create a better tempo that will have us attacking before the defense can set themselves. Rick Carlisle is a good set offense coach, but I prefer a higher tempo and will challenge our team..on a miss shot and a made shot...to get the ball across halfcourt in three seconds, which should prevent the defense from setting themselves, so we'll be more unpredictable than we were in the past.

    One of the big things in having a team being successful with the three-ball, is having a coach committed to it. We don't want to take bad three-point shots, our definition of a good three is when we have a standstill open three-pointer.

    -- http://www.nba.com/pacers/chat/obrien_070613.html

    Rotations:

    Ike's minutes, like everyone else on the team, will be based on his performance.

    -- http://www.nba.com/pacers/chat/obrien_070613.html


    "The whole plan throughout the preseason was to pretty much play the team that we had success with at the end of last year," O'Brien said, "but we weren't healthy enough to do that."
    -- http://www.indystar.com/article/2009...tarting-lineup


    Coach Jim O'Brien had no problem calling out Hibbert and Solomon Jones after the game. O'Brien's didn't like that they only combined for three rebounds. He expects more out of his two centers. The two have to produce if they expect to get extended minutes now that Troy Murphy is back and Jeff Foster is expected to be back at Charlotte on Sunday. -- Mike Wells
    -- http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...he_pacers.html

    Rotation and Returning Players:

    "That's a luxury to be able to do that," O'Brien said. "As always, guys that deserve to play will play. It's that simple. That's not a decision I really have to spend a lot of time thinking about. What it gives the coaching staff is some unbelievable options."

    "The idea is that as we're getting these guys acclimated, we (also have to) win some basketball games," O'Brien said.
    -- http://www.indystar.com/article/2009...em-for-coaches

    "Our rotation is being thought about," O'Brien said. "For me to tell you that I am comfortable with the rotation right now, that would be inaccurate. It's a combination of guys coming from the inactive to the active list.''
    --http://www.indystar.com/article/20091129/SPORTS04/911290354/1004/SPORTS/Dunleavy-feels-good-after-season-debut

    All The Above:

    "There definitely will not be a slower tempo," O'Brien said. "We played statistically at the third-highest pace in the NBA and had the second-most possessions and I know when we're playing our best we're a difficult team to guard. So it has nothing to do with our offensive tempo.
    "It comes down to utilizing a little deeper rotation, maybe a 10-person rotation and having the players know that our staff, and I would say the players themselves, will lean heavily toward the defensive end when it comes time to evaluating who should play and who should not."
    -- http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi..._the_pace.html

    So where are we really now?

    It seems clear to me, though you may disagree, that we are seeing the same JOB approach this year, as last year, as we would have seen if we watched his Philly and Boston years. He wants a certain style of defense which is a bit complicated, and when it clicks and gets stops, it lets the offense push the ball. We are then more likely to find a disorganized opposition defense, and to find an open early shot. Because the defense is more complicated than the offense, it gets the most work in practice.

    It also seems clear that the goal is to win, to get into the play-offs. We're not going to play rookies and 2nd year players just to develop them at the price of a worse record. And I don't think that's driven by JOB. Bird has been very clear about our play-offs goal for this year. If we fired JOB tomorrow, the post-season would be the new coach's goal.

    For our player rotation, O'Brien would like a ten-man rotation if he can get it. He wants to allocate minutes as they're earned, with stress on defensive effort.
    Complicating that, however, has been our constantly changing pool of available players...and who the players were that were not available. (When Travis Diener becomes available again, it's unlikely to cause critical rotation decisions. When the returning player is Dunleavy, Foster or Murphy, decisions must be made.)

    Finally, the return of players to the active roster is not the end-state the coach has to base his rotational decisions on...it's only, finally, the beginning. We are only now at a point where the coach can make a judgement as to which combinations of players are most effective. He can't say right now that Earl Watson and Dunleavy would be a better 1-2 than T.J. Ford and Brandon Rush, because they've never played together. You can't go with the starting five of our win streak if you want to add Dunleavy to the starters, or maybe if you're the coach and you begin to see a fall-off in performance from one of those players. Until recently (based on recent JOB and Dunleavy quotes) the Pacers haven't even really been able to field two full squads for practice. So, it's just going to take some time...maybe the length of this road trip? longer?...before we see a rotation begin to solidify, I think.

    And then, and soon, I truly hope we find a solid rotation and stick with it, because the players need that stability. The obvious disarray we've often displayed on offense this season speaks to the effects of constant line-up changes more than anything else, as I see it.

    Inevitably, some folks here at PD are going to be disappointed when their favorite player is not in that starting unit. And that will seem like the perfect place to start criticising when we lose a game. But maybe they'll be somewhat mollified if we start winning with regularity again.
    Last edited by kester99; 11-30-2009, 01:44 AM.


    [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

  • #2
    Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

    Since I'm about to disagree with you, I wanted to preface by saying I applaud your post for the time and effort you clearly put into it, and I appreciate you doing so. I love it when posts like this come around.

    Now:

    The point of "win now, make the playoffs", aside from the additional revenue and fan interest, centers around giving the young guys, the ones we see as part of our future core post-2011, playoff seasoning so they'll be primed to help our stars win playoff series. I don't see a lot of seasoning if they're fringe rotation players if we even get there.

    Furthmore, the argument being made by some of us is that even if all you do care about is winning now (no matter who makes it happen), you still should be playing the young guys more because they are BETTER than our vets. Sure, less consistent, but better, and they will get consistent more quickly by playing more rather than less.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

      Originally posted by kester99 View Post
      The major topics on this board recently (and almost always) seem to be:

      1. How good are the Pacers?
      2. Do they care about defense?
      3. What the heck is JOB's offense doing?
      4. Why is / isn't Player X playing?
      1. Not very. Mediocre at best. Looks plenty worse than last year.

      2. Not a lick.

      3. Jacking tons of 3s and having little to no movement.

      4. JOB has his veteran favorites that uses as a crutch to not only the detriment of the club's future but also it's present.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        1. Not very. Mediocre at best. Looks plenty worse than last year.

        2. Not a lick.

        3. Jacking tons of 3s and having little to no movement.

        4. JOB has his veteran favorites that uses as a crutch to not only the detriment of the club's future but also it's present.
        Well, that's a good example of kester's point about drive-by critiques.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

          I don't know how a team could possibly be 6th best defensive FG% team and not give a lick about defense

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            Now:

            The point of "win now, make the playoffs", aside from the additional revenue and fan interest, centers around giving the young guys, the ones we see as part of our future core post-2011, playoff seasoning so they'll be primed to help our stars win playoff series. I don't see a lot of seasoning if they're fringe rotation players if we even get there.

            Furthmore, the argument being made by some of us is that even if all you do care about is winning now (no matter who makes it happen), you still should be playing the young guys more because they are BETTER than our vets. Sure, less consistent, but better, and they will get consistent more quickly by playing more rather than less.
            And I don't necessarily disagree with that POV. But I think O'Brien may well believe that he has to do a 'due diligence' look at the combos he has now, that he didn't have two weeks ago.

            He may well end up with Roy, Dahntay and/or Brandon in the starters...but how does he justify no Dunleavy or Murphy or Foster unless he gives them a spin?

            Again, that's trying to see it from his side. Me, I'm just waiting to see the next game. I don't get wrapped around the axle too much by who starts. The lack of driving to the basket bothers me a lot more.


            [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I don't know how a team could possibly be 6th best defensive FG% team and not give a lick about defense
              113-92

              My drive-by critique.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                Another drive by:

                1. How good are the Pacers?

                We don't know. We had a line-up that won 5 straight games for the first time in years, but didn't give it a chance to prove or disprove itself. Assuming it was not better, we are probably worse than last year because we lost Jarrett Jack, Quis and Rasho.

                2. Do they care about defense?

                Not sure who "they" is. If you mean JOb, yes he cares about defense. He just cares about offense more.

                You can always tell how someone feels when they get emotional about something. There was a game last year where the Pacers beat Golden State 127-120. JOb was absolutely giddy after that game...more animated than I ever saw him. Just to paraphrase a couple people: JOb said something to the effect that the game was played the way basketball should be played...notwithstanding the fact the Warriors had a better FG% that the Pacers during the game and scored 120 points. Jarrett Jack said it was like playground ball.

                Personally, I believe Rick Carlisle would have had a different reaction...and I know he loves defense. That's the difference. Make your own conclusions.

                3. What the heck is JOB's offense doing?

                It's attempting to get shots off before the defense settles...because they have no play-maker on the floor when TJ is running the show. IOW, like Bball often says, it's a gimmick. Now, as long as TJ is starting, I'm ok with it. Of course it has no chance of being successful in post-season play, but it probably is the best option when you don't have a real PG.

                4. Why is / isn't Player X playing?

                Money, personality issues and the coach's preference for offensive skill on the floor over other types of skills. IOW, I think highly paid players tend to get the nod...I think JOb is stroking TJ Ford....and I think JOb values different things in a player than a coach like Rick Carlisle (a more successful coach btw) which would favor a more methodical style and players that fit that profile. Players like Roy Hibbert and Dahntay Jones.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post

                  Now:

                  The point of "win now, make the playoffs", aside from the additional revenue and fan interest, centers around giving the young guys, the ones we see as part of our future core post-2011, playoff seasoning so they'll be primed to help our stars win playoff series. I don't see a lot of seasoning if they're fringe rotation players if we even get there.

                  Furthmore, the argument being made by some of us is that even if all you do care about is winning now (no matter who makes it happen), you still should be playing the young guys more because they are BETTER than our vets. Sure, less consistent, but better, and they will get consistent more quickly by playing more rather than less.
                  I kinda missed where this was officially stated to be accomplished by making the playoffs...where was this said?

                  Is the young guns argument made for just Hibbert/Tyler?


                  @BlueNGold:

                  Did you even read the post? If you did, you would see where point 2 seems to be disproven, and the more I think about it, I think that I've been viewing Jimmy the wrong way...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                    I have several thoughts here...

                    - The Pacers are better then what they have shown lately. They are not full of young guys learning how to play. This team has the talent to be .500.

                    - I don't think the offense plays to the team's strength. I think to have a fast pace offense be good you need a better decision maker then TJ at the point to start with. While TJ is capable he is too inconsistent IMO. As far as 3 point shooting goes this team is not full of quality 3 point shooters and I don't care for the freedom of allowing so many 3 point shots. The Pacers rank 23rd in team 3pt shooting at 32% and shoot an average of 20 threes per game. That is not playing to the strengths on offense.

                    - You said that we are not going to play rookies and second year players just to develop them but I think that these rookie(s) and second year players are better then most. Brandon, Roy, and Tyler are all NBA ready they can and have made positive impacts to this team. I guess I just don't like how they are not allowed to be inconsistent they can get yanked from the starting lineup because of their age yet the starting point guard is a veteran and inconsistent and he still starts every game.

                    I will say that I can see the argument to bench Brandon especially now that Dunleavy is back. At the very least Dahntay has outplayed him and deserves to start and Dunleavy could easily earn backup minutes over him. However I really believe that Roy should start and can help the team win. Sure he will have some ups and downs but if coach can live with that from his point guard why can't he do that with his center? Sure he gets in to foul trouble and part of that is his fault but from what I have seen he gets put in difficult situations sometimes with guards getting into the lane. With better perminter defense this would help.

                    I'm just really down on this team right now. I am disappointed because this team is capable of being so much better. I am frustrated too because I have started to lose faith in coach O'Brien for a number of reasons and I just hope that he gets things figured out and that the players don't lose faith in him.
                    Last edited by Young; 11-29-2009, 11:17 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                      Personally, I'm thinking about ten more games would be my limit as far as solidifying rotations and seeing at least some progress in terms of general consistency, especially when it comes to effort. That's probably my biggest complaint about the last five games or so.

                      In the meantime, some of the questions are not without validity. I wouldn't say JOB doesn't care about defense. I would say that to this point in his tenure here, his teams have not grasped and/or been capable of playing the defense he's attempted to install. To those who say it's the players defensive liabilities, I'd respond that he's not helping his case relying so heavily on Murphy then.

                      But let's go back to the Dallas game. Now they turned around and got smacked by a Cleveland team we hung with reasonably well in the last game of the starting five of the five game win streak. I know there are other factors, such as Dallas on second night of back to back on the road and so on and so forth. Yet, if we pay with any heart for the majority of the Mavs game, there's no way that team is that much better than us.

                      So when are we going to see more consistent effort and team unity in the on-court performance? That, to me, should be more of the constant than the systematic and rotational aspects. In part that's on the players, but it also has to be on the coach, too.
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        I don't know how a team could possibly be 6th best defensive FG% team and not give a lick about defense
                        I don't think it is a matter of caring about defense as players. I think they try until they see that it is doing them little good to try to follow the system due to foul trouble or simply not getting to the required spots for whatever reason, whether it be failure to read and react to the overall situation correctly or being unable to cover for the mistakes of others within the system and then being required to re-adjust and just not making it back to the area / player they are supposed to be keying on.

                        I still feel like our guys are better suited to a more traditional defense where they are expected to just play more basic man defense with rotations for help more like Carlisle seemed to run, and Bird / Carlisle / Harter before that, coupled with slowing the tempo about 5 possessions per game with an extra man or two getting on the floor for more than 2 minutes, which would all serve to bolster our newfound defensive players overall performance on both ends of the floor due to not losing our legs for either defense or offense which is still definitely happening, and I believe will continue to due to O'Brien choosing to stay with a relatively similar rotational depth but switching who gets minutes and who no longer does.

                        Currently, if any players were to attempt to play a more traditional defense, with less than 4 years in the NBA, they would find themselves benched due to not following the system, and I guess rightfully so due to the fact that if only one player makes a mistake our system collapses and leaves at least two players open for shots due to both the player that is likely the primary responsibility of the player who made the mistake is left open, but also anyone who then rotates for proper help to cover the mistake then leaves a weakness in their coverage as well.

                        My beef with it is that the difficulty of execution of this system is that it is relatively easy for a disciplined team with good movement (which we also lack, but that is offense, not defense) to bait our players into mistakes and cause our defense to collapse, which seems to happen nearly every game with a higher frequency than it should.

                        Why the FG% ranking is as good as it is seems counter to what appears to be happening on the court, and I suspect that it has to do with the opposing teams letting up / subbing during garbage time.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold
                          3. What the heck is JOB's offense doing?

                          It's attempting to get shots off before the defense settles...because they have no play-maker on the floor when TJ is running the show. IOW, like Bball often says, it's a gimmick.

                          Aw, it is not because the Pacers have no playmaker or because it is a gimmick. (Not saying thoe statements aren't true, but only that they aren't the real reasons.)


                          It is because, as you say, the defense is vulnerable before it gets set up. A fast break is the highest percentage offensive situation. For any team. O'Brien's emphasis on the fast attack offense is simply because he believes it gives his offense the best chance to score. And the love of the three is because a team's Effective Field Goal Percentage can easily be higher for 3s than for two-pointers. Unfortunately, the Pacers have been shooting the 3 badly this year. But they are also getting their inside shots blocked.


                          This is a great thread, Tom K.
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                            Originally posted by flox View Post
                            @BlueNGold:

                            Did you even read the post? If you did, you would see where point 2 seems to be disproven, and the more I think about it, I think that I've been viewing Jimmy the wrong way...
                            Yes, I certainly did read it...assuming the post you refer to is the original post by Kester.

                            I don't read anything at face value...maybe to a fault. When Jim says he cares about defense, I hear him say the words but I don't believe it until I see proof. When I hear JO regurgitating the same thing, it means nothing.

                            The word in the question was "care". I think JOb would be happier to win a game 150-145 than a game 90-85. What do you think?

                            What is actually going on is that he knows the team must defend a certain way because of the way he wants to run the offense. They are intertwined and he has no choice but to mandate the defense. Otherwise, he has to put his toys away and play a traditional game....one that has a chance in the playoffs.

                            He sums it up pretty well. "Some of the things we do here are contrary to other [teams'] defenses,"....well, perhaps all the other coaches with better records are doing it wrong. Maybe they need to take the advice of a coach who is 1-7 with a pretty full roster. I guess it's better than New Jersey...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Jim O'Brien Basketball and the State of the Pacers

                              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                              Personally, I'm thinking about ten more games would be my limit as far as solidifying rotations and seeing at least some progress in terms of general consistency,
                              Agreed...maybe the limit and beyond...call it ten days instead of ten games and I'm there.

                              I would like whoever is chosen to be the best possible combination, but finally it comes down to not having a firm starting line-up is more harmful than having a slightly wrong one.

                              We'd be well into paralysis by analysis if it goes much longer than this road trip and a coupe of more games.


                              [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X