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

Some Love for the Three

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

  • #61
    Re: Some Love for the Three

    I actually can't stand Orlando's offensive strategy either. He's the best center in the league and the team doesn't find him nearly enough.

    As for an offensive system. I think there are plenty of offensive systems. Quite frankly, I actually think a half court offense would have been better for this team. Not having that much offensive talent typically means you want to slow the game down a bit. We would have had to play Earl and AJ as the PGs, but we should do that no matter what system. Other than that, I think Rush and Roy play better in that kind of system, and I don't think it matters much for Danny and Troy.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Some Love for the Three

      But would a more grind-out style of play lead to better shots? Where would they come from? If I were Jim O'Brien last season, I'd have cared mostly about creating a more dynamic transition game, not so much on slowing down the pace and try to handle set defenses in the half-court. Hibbert still isn't the kind of guy that demands a double-team consistently, nobody who can consistently penetrate and force the defense to collapse, not a lot of guys who are natural cutters, able to create shots off-the-ball, no high-caliber shot-creators on isolations.. this team would be bottom 5 offensively in the half-court. The best close game I saw the Pacers having last season was one where TJ Ford went bananas firing mid-range jump-shots off a ballscreen.

      Howard is a big part of Orlando's game, he's the central piece of their offense. Teams just put a lot of focus on stopping him and that opens the game for their other guys making it look like he's being underused. Besides the transition 3s he creates by merely running the floor, that playoff series versus Charlotte last season is a prime example. Jameer Nelson went bananas not exactly because he was dominating his counterpart but due to the Bobcats focusing so much on defending Howard - their screen defenders would just stay with Howard and not give Felton any kind of help in the screenroll game.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Some Love for the Three

        I don't know as much about basketball as you guys, but why don't we get Hibbert moving around in the post instead of standing near the free throw line and having to fight inside for a hook or lay up? After watching it all last season, it just doesn't make sense to me. We have a few good passers that could get it to Roy moving to the inside for easy points. More movement = better. boom baby.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Some Love for the Three

          Originally posted by cordobes View Post
          But would a more grind-out style of play lead to better shots? Where would they come from? If I were Jim O'Brien last season, I'd have cared mostly about creating a more dynamic transition game, not so much on slowing down the pace and try to handle set defenses in the half-court. Hibbert still isn't the kind of guy that demands a double-team consistently, nobody who can consistently penetrate and force the defense to collapse, not a lot of guys who are natural cutters, able to create shots off-the-ball, no high-caliber shot-creators on isolations.. this team would be bottom 5 offensively in the half-court. The best close game I saw the Pacers having last season was one where TJ Ford went bananas firing mid-range jump-shots off a ballscreen.

          Howard is a big part of Orlando's game, he's the central piece of their offense. Teams just put a lot of focus on stopping him and that opens the game for their other guys making it look like he's being underused. Besides the transition 3s he creates by merely running the floor, that playoff series versus Charlotte last season is a prime example. Jameer Nelson went bananas not exactly because he was dominating his counterpart but due to the Bobcats focusing so much on defending Howard - their screen defenders would just stay with Howard and not give Felton any kind of help in the screenroll game.
          See I don't agree. I think that, for the most part, the players on this team are more built for a half court offense. (well now not as much, Collison obviously would prefer and up and down game.)

          Particularly Roy and Rush. Roy's just not built for a transition game, and Rush needs structure. I think this is especially important when you consider that last year, after Danny, Roy was our best player, and Danny was out quite a bit last season..so wouldn't we be better off playing a system that would be better for Roy?

          And I still feel like they don't get Howard as involved as they should. I know him being there creates opportunities for others, but he's still Orlando's best option, and a lot of times he's not treated like it.

          Of course, this is probably some personal bias here, as I like a nice pretty halfcourt game much more than a transition one (which is fun to watch..but..just not the same.)
          Last edited by Sookie; 08-27-2010, 01:24 AM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Some Love for the Three

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            And I still feel like they don't get Howard as involved as they should. I know him being there creates opportunities for others, but he's still Orlando's best option, and a lot of times he's not treated like it.

            Of course, this is probably some personal bias here, as I like a nice pretty halfcourt game much more than a transition one (which is fun to watch..but..just not the same.)
            The problem is that Howard seems to get a large majority of his offense from highly efficient oops and putbacks. He doesn't have much of a post game. What he does have, is the ability to get around you, go over you, or back you down. Basically he owns positioning.

            He's not a guy you can just give it to in the post and wait for him to get his own offense. He erases his teammates mistakes.

            I think they utilize Howard perfectly in Orlando. I don't think they have the proper personnel elsewhere to win a championship though.
            "man, PG has been really good."

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Some Love for the Three

              You bring up an excellent point. The Pacers didn't have the kind of talent to shoot from deep last season. (We could argue about that, with Danny, Troy and Brandon all good three point shooters, but that is not my point). OK for sake of discussion what kind of talent did the pacers have.
              how many big 3's has Rush hit in his career? his stats are misleading. i think rush can improve, but so far he is not consistent. Murph is a good shooter, but no post game at all; even high post, where i think he would do well. Granger is a good shooter but he relies on it way too heavily. Granger attempted the 4th most 3 pt. attempts last season per Espn.

              http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/pl...GoalsAttempted


              Did they have a good low post player? No. Roy was average last season.
              Roy is young, and is our core foundation, most pacer fans knew that after his rookie season. all im saying is give Hibbert the ball down low 5+ possessions.

              Did they have a dynamic point guard who could score and breakdown defenses? No
              no, and they did have several players injured, i like Foster and hope he is healthy, along with Dunleavy, it makes our bench strong. Hansbro as well, but have to wait and see with him. basically, if Bird supports JO'B then I will suppot him. interesting observation as you mentioned something below about Obrien to coach at ORL. SVG was Birds initial replacement for Carlisle. SVG also runs a 4 out offense i guess you could say. Maybe this is Birds style that he wants.

              Last season was a tough season for the Pacers, Granger was out along with other players. Difficult for me to bash Obrien for last year; the previous season i felt like the team played hard and well. Im willing to give Obrien one more year. Like i said, maybe this is the style he wants the team to play, since it is also SVG's style. though, i think that was in place when Gundy was given the job. Either way, Howard is a beast down low, therefore a team can play that style.

              Did they have a wing player who could score and breakdown defenses? No, danny can score, but not breakdown and create for others.
              i dont like seeing Danny shoot the fourth most 3's in the league last year. when he can drive to the rim, and can also post his defender up. i think its gonna be great now with DC on the court, 33 will finally have someone to set him up, along with rush. im not wanting to annoint DC the next Action Jackson or better, but I think Granger is going to benefit. so again, Obrien should recieve one more season. He stuck with us when this team had very little talent, and several injuries. Dunleavy being one of them along with Foster. Obrien should be able to get this team to 44 wins if they are healthy overall. Less than 40 and we begin to consider a replacement, if someone is worth considering. again, Im going to defer to Legend.

              Just what were the Pacers strengths offensively last season. I would argue they were few and far between. We had Danny and his ability to score, shoot, get hot. OK, what else did we have. Troy from three on pick and pops was one of our more unique strengths, and that play did at the very least cause defensives to adjust. What else? I would argue the 3 at least gave us a shooters chance. Our quick shooting style at least gave our offense a chance to get decent shots.
              I preferred Carlisle's system. interesting enough the Pacers during his teams years averaged high in 3 pt attempts as well. we had JO so it opened up the perimeter. I think the 3pt shot is almost always available with less than 10 seconds on the shot clock. would like to see more passing in the offense. i gotta say Foster plays right at the FT line and distributes the ball. i would have liked to see murph in that role more often. he was good at driving to the rim w/ a pump fake. i still basically feel Granger is shooting way too many 3's.


              I would argue we have pretty good passing bigs with Roy, Jeff and Josh, but jeff played hardly at all and Josh only after March 1st. Mike Dunleavy when healthy is an effective player and perfect for this system.

              But those of you who complain about what the Pacers tried to do, what else would have worked better. What system would have matched better with the talent?
              Granger posting up more. more movement in the offense. with the 3 pt shot not the primary scoring opportunity. was murphy that bad at posting up? but thats just my opinion, i trust that Bird feels some confidence with Obrien at coach. i do feel like SVG was Birds first choice and if we have the talent and cap room to attract a better coach Bird might look into it. I think Byron Scott would have been a good choice but im sure there are other coaches out there to consider, and if not Obrien may overachieve this year.

              Edit: on a related point - I think Jim O'Brien would love to have a deference maker as a low post player. His dream team to coach is the Magic.
              im okay with Obrien one more season, he should recieve another chance. last year was brutal. he has talent this year, albeit young talent, the pacers should be in the 40-44 win range. 36-40 and the Pacers explore the options available. Bird has eluded to wanting a PF who can score down low, which this team definitely needs right now. JO in his youth would be ideal next to Hibbert.
              Last edited by PacersPride; 08-27-2010, 12:26 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Some Love for the Three

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                1) I was specifically just talking about the offensive production - which is what this thread is about. Certainly Larry Brown could have gotten this team to play much better team defense and individual defense, so sure he could have gotten more wins out of this team, but that wasn't even close to the point I was making. I was only talking about an offensive system

                2) And I was asking an honest question. I wanted to know if someone could tell me a different offensive system which would work better with last years team than the one Jim ran. No one has attempted to answer that question
                You more or less answered your own question. Any coach that would've taken stock of our offensive woes and maximized our defensive potential (which would include not running an offense that harmed our defensive abilities) would've had a better offensive system.

                And of course, I always say: Coaching matters

                Everyone's view of a team is always based on what a certain coach gets out of them. But change the coach and you change the players' approach to the game, and suddenly they have 'different' talents. But it isn't really that they have different talents, it's that they are utilized differently and so different abilities shine thru (while others are sacrificed or lost to the system). The trick is, and the part I absolutely believe Jim O'Brien is horrible at, is finding a balance that works. Jim is too focused on his system of rushed shots.... defense be dam-ed...
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Some Love for the Three

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  You more or less answered your own question. Any coach that would've taken stock of our offensive woes and maximized our defensive potential (which would include not running an offense that harmed our defensive abilities) would've had a better offensive system.

                  And of course, I always say: Coaching matters

                  Everyone's view of a team is always based on what a certain coach gets out of them. But change the coach and you change the players' approach to the game, and suddenly they have 'different' talents. But it isn't really that they have different talents, it's that they are utilized differently and so different abilities shine thru (while others are sacrificed or lost to the system). The trick is, and the part I absolutely believe Jim O'Brien is horrible at, is finding a balance that works. Jim is too focused on his system of rushed shots.... defense be dam-ed...
                  the quote:

                  "the best defense is often a good offense" applys to your statement. everyone has their opinion on what a good offense entails. I still have to defer it to Legend. Obrien will have the talent to win 40 this season.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Some Love for the Three

                    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                    the quote:

                    Obrien will have the talent to win 40 this season.
                    True, and he has previously if a different system that emphasized passing instead of shot creation had been used (among other things that could have been changed but are not being discussed under this topic), but, under his system if the 3's happen to not fall at a high rate, even this year's version will have difficulty winning 40 IMO, unless our interior game is both utilized more consistently and is more effective, both in offensive efficiency and on the boards.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Some Love for the Three

                      I want to revive this with a different focus, just to give an alternative subject to trade speculation and irrelevant games overseas.


                      Am I the only one who thinks the high arc of the basketball on its way to the hoop is a thing of beauty. I also think shooting a long shot is probably the greatest physical skill in the game. The long jumpshot takes skill and cannot be faked.

                      I know some people get enthused about dunks, but heck, I could dunk a ball myself when I was 20. I never did it with anything larger than a volleyball, to be perfectly honest, but if I could do it at all then the physical prowess involved can't be that great.

                      Look at this:


                      Six snotty kids, playing dunkball on an 8-foot rim. I ask you: is this basketball, or a perversion of it?



                      I understand that a balanced attack is essential to winning. The Pacers do deserve criticism last season when they shied away from attacking the rim and settled for outside shots. And they did this some, though not as perpetually as some posters here want to say they did.

                      No, I think jump shots are the best part of the game. I like crisp passes and really good individual on-the-ball defense, too. But there's nothing like a good high-arcing swish!

                      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


                      • #71
                        Re: Some Love for the Three

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        Wow. And you've only been here a couple of months and you're ready to puke? Just be glad you haven't been here longer. Like before June (when you joined PD, remember), when they were actually playing games and everyone was griping about Troy's soft rebounds.

                        Not everyone was griping about Troy's rebounding. I said then, and I say now that Troy was under appreciated by the fans here in Indiana. The problems we have were much more at PG than PF..
                        Go Pacers!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Some Love for the Three

                          Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                          ... the three O'Brien years have seen the team with the three worst league defensive rankings of the last 11...
                          http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/IND/2010.html

                          Basketball Reference has them ranked 14th last season. Your claim is simply mistaken, and misrepresents the team and its priorities.

                          .
                          :

                          "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

                          "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

                          "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Some Love for the Three

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            I want to revive this with a different focus, just to give an alternative subject to trade speculation and irrelevant games overseas.


                            Am I the only one who thinks the high arc of the basketball on its way to the hoop is a thing of beauty. I also think shooting a long shot is probably the greatest physical skill in the game. The long jumpshot takes skill and cannot be faked.

                            I know some people get enthused about dunks, but heck, I could dunk a ball myself when I was 20. I never did it with anything larger than a volleyball, to be perfectly honest, but if I could do it at all then the physical prowess involved can't be that great.
                            I don't think I'm going to say anything that's going to rewrite the history books but....

                            Dunking a volleyball is not the same as dunking a basketball. And you know this.

                            I played basketball with a kid that was all of 5'7" and could shoot lights out. He won the BSU 3pt contest multiple times, but outside of shooting, he isn't/wasn't worth a lick. Too small to play defense, too small to rebound, couldn't handle the ball without turning it over against pressure. But if I needed a partner to play 56 or 41, I would pick him everytime.

                            Dunking a volleyball, with no defender or need to actually dribble your way to the rim doesn't automatically translate to the court, just like shooting around and hitting a high percentage doesn't automatically translate into a game shooter.

                            Being able to rise up, and dunk the ball isn't the skill. Being able to set up the defense to get to the rim, and having the ability to control the ball to get there is a lot more difficult.

                            I can do a pretty nasty cross over dribble, but just haven't done so against any defense. About the same....
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Some Love for the Three

                              Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                              http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/IND/2010.html

                              Basketball Reference has them ranked 14th last season. Your claim is simply mistaken, and misrepresents the team and its priorities.

                              .
                              Sorry for the derail Putnam.

                              O'Bird,

                              Actually, you are mistaken.

                              "Also, the three O'Brien years have seen the team with the three worst league defensive rankings of the last 11"

                              It may not have been well stated in retrospect, but I did not intend to say that the team was worst in the entire league for the last 3 seasons. What I did intend to say is the fact that the Pacers RANKED lower within the league defensive rankings during the last three years than they have at any other time in the last 11 years.

                              The defensive rankings have been (and the Pace rankings are in parentheses for each year)

                              1999-2000 13th (15th)
                              2000-2001 11th (24th)
                              2001-2002 11th (8th)
                              2002-2003 5th (10th)
                              2003-2004 3rd (26th)
                              2004-2005 11th (29th)
                              2005-2006 4th (20th)
                              2006-2007 9th (10th)
                              2007-2008 15th (3rd)
                              2008-2009 19th (3rd)
                              2009-2010 14th (2nd)

                              Nothing about that statement misrepresents the team or its priorities. What it does show is that the Pacers have not been as highly ranked within the league defensively as they had been accustomed to being, and there are at least two significant factors that contribute to it in my opinion. No healthy JO or interior presence to make up for the lack of effective perimeter defense is one, and likely the largest one. Pace is the second major factor, as well, IMO, though the negative impact of that lessened this past season with the additional usage of Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert staying out of foul trouble somewhat better, coupled with more minutes being played by teams who did not need their best effort to beat the Pacers from an offensive standpoint during the dark days of this past winter prior to Danny returning from injury with an improved ability to hit jumpers and drive to the basket more effectively than he had earlier in the season. I believe that the ranking of 14th seems too high, and that similar to where the team was ranked in the league from a team record standpoint (21st) is likely more representative of its defensive effort, much like its offense with the injured Granger being relatively ineffective had a ranking of 20th, which was likely too low. That is why I (and others) asked previously in another thread why you believe that the team was better defensively than it was offensively this past season, and we await your response if you could indulge us with your insights.

                              For 2010 here are the team Defensive Rankings and their associated Pace Rankings (Pace Ranking in parentheses)

                              1. Charlotte (26th)
                              2. Milwaukee (19th)
                              3. Orlando (18th)
                              4. Lakers (14th)
                              5. Boston (23rd)
                              6. Cleveland (25th)
                              7. Miami (28th)
                              8. San Antonio (20th)
                              9. Oklahoma City (13th)
                              10. Utah (9th)
                              11. Chicago (12th)
                              12. Dallas (17th)
                              13. Atlanta (27th)
                              14. Indiana (2nd)
                              15. Portland (30th)
                              16. Denver (5th)
                              17. Houston (8th)
                              18. Washington (21st)
                              19. Sacramento (6th)
                              20. Memphis (10th)
                              21. Clippers (15th)
                              22. New Orleans (16th)
                              23. Phoenix (4th)
                              24. Philadelphia (22nd)
                              25. New Jersey (24th)
                              26. Detroit (29th)
                              27. Minnesota (3rd)
                              28. New York (7th)
                              29. Golden State (1st)
                              30. Toronto (11th)

                              We shall see if things continue at their current level with Danny being healthy and other teams feeling more threatened by the Pacers offense, and likely a reduced role for Rush, at least early in the season, due to his unfortunate lifestyle choice. It should help a lot that the slow footed Murphy is no longer an issue defensively, and our defensive rebounding should actually improve as well due to having multiple players responsible for getting those rebounds instead of it being what almost appeared to be an assigned task for Murphy, which may be somewhat contrary to conventional wisdom. Hopefully, also, Roy has been absorbing a whole lot from his time with Bill Walton because it would help the team tremendously to have somebody who can erase the defensive mistakes that our perimeter players have made frequently in the past.

                              So, overall, I guess the team may improve somewhat from a defensive standpoint this upcoming season even without any additional players coming back from injuries being taken into account, and may even reach the middle of the pack or so, which would be a testament to the efforts of the players in the face of having to overcome a system that appears, to us outsiders who watch the games at least, to have offense as a primary focus, with our best player currently not playing much for Team USA for the most part because of a lack of defensive skills despite being an exceptional shooter when he is fully healthy.

                              Offensively, the team should improve markedly with a healthy Granger, an improved Roy (hopefully, and hopefully with increased utilization as well), and the addition of Collison, though his high turnover rate is a concern, especially with the directive to create shots first and then look for others after driving into the paint on the part of the point guards. Hopefully he can hit enough perimeter shots to make up for that deficit, unless he is going to be utilized differently than the rest of our point guards have been since O'Brien has been here.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Some Love for the Three

                                Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                                What I'm trying to show here is that the 3 is NOT the problem that is is often made out to be. If O'Brien is susceptible to criticism for using a gimmicky game plan, it is the fast pace and not the use of the 3 that is his gimmick.
                                The point is well taken, but it's hard to argue against a quick pace; I know that you're using some rhetoric here, but a quick pace is hardly a gimmick, and it's easy to see why it's a good idea for the Pacers' roster; they're not blessed with much offensive ability, and early offense is when you can get the most mismatches in your favor and the least protection for the paint, equalizing their limitations. The fast break itself is only the tip of the iceberg; D’Antoni’s teams play “seven seconds or less” because you’ve got a window after all five defenders are back before they get sorted out.

                                I've heard people say that Roy Hibbert is not suited to a quick tempo; this is a misunderstanding of what's involved. First of all, he doesn’t need to beat his man up the floor. Early offense is a great time to post up, when the defense is trying to stop the ball and the least organized part of the defense is on the weak side and the help in general; Roy can hit cutters as well as make a move himself. He hasn’t been great popping from the elbows in his pro career, but it’s a shot he’s worked on since college; that’s another good early offense shot for him since he’s got a great chance at a clear view.

                                On the relationship between tempo and defense: how would you know that pushing it up the floor and looking for early shots was hurting you on the other end? So far the argument in favor has not been based on anything concrete. It is true that veteran teams play better defense; there’s a learning curve. AND it’s also true that veteran teams, being older, tend to play a slower tempo and be more effective in a half-court game.

                                But that doesn’t mean that a quick tempo means that a team can’t get to the top of the mountain, let alone play top-drawer defense.

                                Case in point: the Lakers.
                                2010: 14th in tempo, 4th in defense;
                                2009: 5th in tempo, 6th in defense;
                                2008: 6th in tempo, 5th in defense.

                                But of course an argument one way or the other is only interesting if it fits the actual Indiana Pacers. Applying suppositions, or even generalities - however generally true - are in the end not worth much if you want to look at whether the Pacers should play quick and whether it hurts their defense to do so.

                                We should consider first what that might mean. Does a quick tempo make you more tired, less able to defend? It’s not likely - if it’s making one team tired, it must be making the other team tired, too. In any case the team that’s pushing it up the floor is running forward, while the defensive team is running backward; shouldn’t the defensive team be working harder?

                                More fundamentally, it’s also hard to get around the simple fact that we’re talking about pro athletes who are paid princely sums to be in shape and to get the job done that they’re asked to do. We could go further, inquiring into whether early offense really is more tiring than half-court structured offense, but that’s enough of an argument for now.

                                I have a notion of how you would look into whether or not the Pacers’ tempo hurts their defense, but perhaps the proponents of the theory have something concrete to show that we can discuss, rather than settle for speculation and assumption, however reasonable.
                                :
                                :

                                "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

                                "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

                                "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X