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

Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

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

  • Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

    Guess which team has committed the most fouls so far this season in the NBA Eastern Conference?

    OK, that's no surprise to anybody. But I want to look a step deeper.

    Not only have the Pacers committed the most fouls, but they've also given the most Free Throw Attempts by a wider margin. The chart shows the ratio of opponents' free throw attempts to team fouls. The Pacers being highest means Pacers fouls come more often in situations when free throws are given:






    The fouls the Pacers commit, which are more numerous in total, are also committed in situations where more shots are given.

    I don't have a source of two-shot fouls, one-shot fouls and no-shot fouls. But clearly the Pacers commit a combination a fouls that hurt their chances of winning more than other teams do. (Last night against Portland was a clear case of this.)


    1. How do you explain it?

    2. Does it matter?

    3. How would you change it?

    4. Is it O'Brien's fault?



    .
    Last edited by Putnam; 03-04-2010, 08:37 AM.
    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)

  • #2
    Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

    It's lazy defense. I'm not sure there's much more to it than that...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

      We have players starting who don't have the foot speed to stay in front of their man on defense (cough, Murphy, cough), so others are forced to help out. If the help comes late there is usually going to be a foul..
      Last edited by Mr. Sobchak; 03-04-2010, 08:48 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

        Originally posted by Putnam View Post



        1. How do you explain it?

        2. Does it matter?

        3. How would you change it?

        4. Is it O'Brien's fault?



        .

        Yes it is O'Brien's fault - isn't everything his fault.


        The only question I really want to answer is number 2. Yes is matters, it matters a ton. I think free throw attempts per game is a very important stat. Not giving up free throws and getting free throws is hugely important. Strangely enough ft shooting % doesn't seem like it matters too much. if you look at the Cavs, Spurs (over the years) any of Shaq's teams. Seems more important just to shoot a lot of free throws. gets the other team in foul trouble, wears them down, plus make or miss it allows your defense to get set up.

        The Pacers biggest problem is that they give up too many FT's and not get nearly enough. A lot of it is the style of play, and the players we have on the roster.

        I've often said that the style of offense I want is a team that gets about 40 ft's per game. The only coach we've had that seemed to emphasize it enough for my liking was Larry Brown and also in a small way Isiah Thomas.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

          Originally posted by spreedom View Post
          It's lazy defense. I'm not sure there's much more to it than that...
          Remember that the Pacers are holding their opponent to the 10th lowest FG% in the NBA this season. That is quite respectable. Can we call them lazy when they are stopping their opponents from scoring better than 20 other teams? If they were really lazy, they'd be worst in opponents' FG% and more moderate in free throws given, don't you think?

          Mr Sobchak is onto something. The Pacers do interfere with opponents' scoring, but they too seldom do it with a clean deflection and too often with a grab or push or slap.

          Maybe they should back off a little and really play the Ole! defense.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

            1) The consistent commentary I hear, which matches what I see, is that we don't "help the helper" in the team defense.

            That means when someone rotates away to help on a ball handler, no one comes in to cover his man. This is most glaring on a pick-and-roll (since it is, after all, the whole point of the pnr), but it happens quite often without being forced (see my previous comments about TJ as only one small example).

            This causes the original player, or a post defender, to have to come in late. Whenever you come in late, there's a strong chance of fouling on a shot attempt.

            2) We put the other team into the penalty nearly every quarter, which automatically results in FTAs.

            3) We get into the air on defense at a crazy rate. When Hibbert isn't playing his best this is one of his habits, to be 7' 2" and still jump to defend. When we defend small, we get into the air. Only a couple of our players manage to keep their feet on the floor when defending.
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

              Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post
              We have players starting who don't have the foot speed to stay in front of their man on defense (cough, Murphy, cough), so others are forced to help out. If the help comes late there is usually going to be a foul..
              I'll say again that, at least in recent home games where I am in a position to focus on Murphy, he isn't always being blown past or forcing someone else to foul. He is usually the guy moving off his man to help and then no one picks up his man.

              When he isn't moving to help he defends fairly well.
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                Remember that the Pacers are holding their opponent to the 10th lowest FG% in the NBA this season. That is quite respectable. Can we call them lazy when they are stopping their opponents from scoring better than 20 other teams? If they were really lazy, they'd be worst in opponents' FG% and more moderate in free throws given, don't you think?

                Mr Sobchak is onto something. The Pacers do interfere with opponents' scoring, but they too seldom do it with a clean deflection and too often with a grab or push or slap.

                Maybe they should back off a little and really play the Ole! defense.
                Could it be that the FG% is helped, due to them fouling on shots?

                Think about it. If they weren't to foul, I'm sure a good percentage of those shots would go in, thus raising the FG%. The counter-argument is that it would affect the numbers all that much. My next point is, that only 0.005% seperates Indiana, and the next 6 teams. That's not much, at all.

                15 teams are seperated by 1.5% with that stat. You could very easily be #10, or just as easily be #26.

                EDIT: Is there a site that keeps rankings for points per 100 possesions? I know 82games.com has the stat, but don't see a ranked list for teams.
                Last edited by Since86; 03-04-2010, 09:47 AM.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  I'll say again that, at least in recent home games where I am in a position to focus on Murphy, he isn't always being blown past or forcing someone else to foul. He is usually the guy moving off his man to help and then no one picks up his man.

                  When he isn't moving to help he defends fairly well.
                  (Thread derail)
                  This makes me curious. We have a lot of people on here that don't really know what's going on in a game x and o's wise and they are making a lot of judgmental statements. What we need to do in the game thread is everyone focus on one player.

                  Say the next game everyone focus on Murphy instead of watching the ball and then actually discuss his play good and bad during the game and why it's good or bad. I know I could learn a lot because I don't really know zilch.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                    Originally posted by Since86
                    EDIT: Is there a site that keeps rankings for points per 100 possesions? I know 82games.com has the stat, but don't see a ranked list for teams.

                    I think HoopsData.com does.

                    .
                    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


                    • #11
                      Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                      Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post
                      We have players starting who don't have the foot speed to stay in front of their man on defense (cough, Murphy, cough), so others are forced to help out. If the help comes late there is usually going to be a foul..
                      Others like cough, cough Hibbert? Murphy has his problems, but Hibbert is the snail. Murphy is the tortoise.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                        (Thread derail)
                        This makes me curious. We have a lot of people on here that don't really know what's going on in a game x and o's wise and they are making a lot of judgmental statements. What we need to do in the game thread is everyone focus on one player.

                        Say the next game everyone focus on Murphy instead of watching the ball and then actually discuss his play good and bad during the game and why it's good or bad. I know I could learn a lot because I don't really know zilch.
                        The beauty of DVR lets you focus on certain guys bigtime. Sometimes I'll rewind like the Zupruder films. I think you see alot more doing this as far as real roots of problems.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                          It is a combination of factors. True, poor perimeter defense from our displaced big Murphy makes teams drive past him into our either A) inexperienced Roy or B) rotating help that has been too busy reacting to keeping some sort of "perimeter" set up in their own portion of the floor to be able to get into position in time to draw charges instead of fouling.

                          But, it goes much deeper than that. Our other perimeter players, with the exception of Rush, have had deficiencies in preventing drives due to either injury (Granger has been hobbled for quite a few games earlier in the year, making it difficult for him to move laterally and with quickness which has limited his effectiveness in staying in front of his man) or just being required to cover too much space due to the inadequacies of Murphy and Granger which requires them to both cover their own areas and probably then overextending their coverages by a pretty large percentage. Our opponents recognize this and regularly exploit it by driving with intent to score.

                          Another more limited factor is our method, particularly Dahntay's, of being aggressive and getting into the heads of our opposition by using hand and elbow contact to attempt to control the offensive players that we are over matched against. In the 1980's, that was good defense. Today, rules are different to increase scoring and the overall speed of the game and that results in extra unnecessary fouls being called for excessive contact. I am sure that this tendency is a good portion of why Dahntay has ended up with limited minutes compared to what his early season performance would have suggested, and is also why Denver would have chosen to play him only 17 minutes as a starter and eventually let him go.

                          Most important of all, in my mind, is the tremendous advantage that fundamental basketball strategy automatically hands our opposition if they choose to exploit it, namely the fact that many games are won and lost at the FT line. Those teams recognize that our offense is actually designed in such a way that we generally don't shoot many freethrows which limits our potential offensive output due to less scoring per FG attempt and less potential points per possession regardless of what pace we choose to play at. So, naturally, the teams that do recognize this attack us, especially when we have committed some unnecessary fouls to begin with in an effort to be "aggressive", and either get fouls from driving into traffic and getting fouled in the act of shooting, or drawing enough non-shooting fouls by driving into traffic with the intention of scoring (instead of kicking out for 3's), thereby forcing us to defend and increase our likelihood of committing fouls, thereby getting into the bonus and once again shooting more FTs.

                          We also are relatively poor at getting into good rebounding position compared to our opponents, which limits our getting the benefit of over-the-back calls against our opponents while increasing the likelihood, when we actually try to get contested boards, of our committing fouls, which in turn also further widens the discrepancy against us.

                          Does this matter? Unquestionably. Again, the easiest and most efficient points scored in basketball come from the line, and many games are won / lost at the line.

                          I would change it by doing several things.

                          First, I would slow the overall tempo to match the available athleticism and energy that we have available as a roster. Fatigue and injuries are a big factor in picking up unnecessary fouls as much as it is in not being able to cover the space required to create the "perimeter", which I am not sure is even a good idea to begin with. Also, a slower pace with fewer possessions would reduce the effect of our disparity at the line on the end result of the scoreboard even if the results are the same in percentage terms.

                          Second, I would limit 3's and increase not just driving ("attacking the paint") but also driving with the intent of actually scoring or, God forbid, feeding Roy in the low post more frequently with the intent of scoring ("attacking the BASKET"). This would draw additional fouls on the opposition and increase our scoring efficiency while encouraging perimeter movement due to defenses sagging more than they currently do and opening up our perimeter for quality shots later in the shot clock after the defense is forced to react to our ball and player movement, you know, like basketball is generally played elsewhere.

                          Third, I would limit the amount of help defense tht is played by our point guards and just have them pressure the ball at the point of attack because their quickness gives them more of an advantage that way defensively than asking them to use their short statures, legs, and wingspans to cover a lot of lateral ground. I would leave a rotating and collapsing help scheme for the 3 through 5 positions at deeper positions on the floor, with the primary function of the 3 to be a roving ball follower whose primary function is to stop dribble penetration and some entry passes, while the 4 and 5 rotate and help each other in the low post area as much as league rules permit them to.

                          Decision making, both communication of and getting player buy-in to a strategically sound vision, and strategic management of available assets in an effort to maximize results both currently as well as in the future is, in my opinion, the very definition of the function of the head coach. The buck stops with the coach, and ultimately, unless he is fulfilling the majority of these functions, it is his fault. So, yes, but with reason, it is O'B's fault.

                          Actually, it is even more complex than what I have presented here, but I don't think very many would fully read and comprehend such a long post unless it was from our renowned expert Tbird, and perhaps shouldn't anayway. Maybe he can weigh in on this issue in the near future. How is his team doing, BTW? Hopefully well!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                            (Thread derail)
                            This makes me curious. We have a lot of people on here that don't really know what's going on in a game x and o's wise and they are making a lot of judgmental statements. What we need to do in the game thread is everyone focus on one player.

                            Say the next game everyone focus on Murphy instead of watching the ball and then actually discuss his play good and bad during the game and why it's good or bad. I know I could learn a lot because I don't really know zilch.
                            If your suggesting that I'm not watching the games then you are wrong...I maybe have missed 5 games this year due to conflicts. Maybe Bill and I are watching two different Murphy's then because I consistently see him get blown by a guy putting the ball on the floor.

                            Originally posted by EmCeE
                            Others like cough, cough Hibbert? Murphy has his problems, but Hibbert is the snail. Murphy is the tortoise.
                            Hibbert is slow, yes, but riddle me this.. Why is the defense so much more improved when Roy plays next to Solo or McBob? Because he doesn't have to cover up for Troy's poor defense.
                            Last edited by Mr. Sobchak; 03-04-2010, 11:10 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                              Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post


                              Hibbert is slow, yes, but riddle me this.. Why is the defense so much more improved when Roy plays next to Solo or McBob? Because he doesn't have to cover up for Troy's poor defense.
                              last season it was obvious that Troy and Roy defensively were horrible. Why? simply put, Troy is a horrible defender and Roy is pretty much too. Both are extremely slow and both foul way too much. So when you replace either with someone else the defense improves a lot. last season I thought Jeff and Roy was a decent combo (but then I suppose I would think Jeff and anyone is a decent combo)

                              I don't think Roy having to cover-up for Troy really is the reason though

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X