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

Very disappointed about the Coach.....

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

  • #16
    Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

    Originally posted by flox View Post
    1. Blame the turnovers. You can't score or attempt to score if you are turning over the ball at that rate. It's hard to play good defense when the opponent gets the ball while you are trying to exectute the offense. We probably would have won if we didn't turn over the ball so much. We don't take care of the rock.
    2. You have to trust your defense to get the stop. We debatably got the stop. I don't think that was a foul on Roy.
    1. You can blame everything about lose a game, but let me told you that:
    We have 19 TO tonight BUT Bucks also have 15 TO
    But we are better team than Bucks(they have no Boguts on the court)
    So it's the reason why we lose the game because of more 4 TO?
    We can win the game easier when the team make right rotaion and put george,josh,tyler on the court
    We shouldn't lose tonight game anyway!

    2. It's just a poor decison! Even i don't agree about the last call, but we should make foul to stop the game anyway in that moment.
    only 1-3 sec different between shot clock and game time
    so it's tough to play defense and make winning shot

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

      There was a 3 sec difference in the clocks, so I thought it was the right call not to foul. We had been playing good defense on them the last few minutes. I don't know why you can be so upset about this though, I mean we DID end up fouling them with 5.5 sec left and they made both shots to clinch the game. I would like to know what difference you think it would have made if we had fouled them sooner? By not fouling, you at least give yourself a shot to tie or win if you get a stop.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

        Originally posted by IndyMac View Post
        There was a 3 sec difference in the clocks, so I thought it was the right call not to foul. We had been playing good defense on them the last few minutes. I don't know why you can be so upset about this though, I mean we DID end up fouling them with 5.5 sec left and they made both shots to clinch the game. I would like to know what difference you think it would have made if we had fouled them sooner? By not fouling, you at least give yourself a shot to tie or win if you get a stop.
        It is elementary level stuff. You extend the game as long as you can. Say Roy didn't foul and they ran the clock down and took a shot with 3 seconds left. That gives us probably 1.5 seconds at the most to attempt a winner. Not going to be a high percentage shot.

        As soon as Granger missed his shot we should have fouled.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

          Originally posted by flox View Post
          1. No. They are better team defenders currently and we had no other options.
          2. No. You don't foul in that sitatution. You have to trust your defense.
          1. I don't feel Posey is the defender he use to be. Too slow, and doesn't move laterally very well. Only reason he is on the floor is because he can shoot the 3, let's just be honest.

          2. I have to respectfully disagree. If you watched the game there was like a 2 seconds difference between the shot clock and game clock (not exaggerating, have the game DVRed). If the Bucks were smart they would have just held the ball to the final second and threw the ball in the air as the game would've been over. We actually lucked out Salmons attempted to drive to the lane. Too bad Roy was charged with a block

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

            Originally posted by IndyMac View Post
            There was a 3 sec difference in the clocks, so I thought it was the right call not to foul. We had been playing good defense on them the last few minutes. I don't know why you can be so upset about this though, I mean we DID end up fouling them with 5.5 sec left and they made both shots to clinch the game. I would like to know what difference you think it would have made if we had fouled them sooner? By not fouling, you at least give yourself a shot to tie or win if you get a stop.
            So that means you will let the 27 sec down to 3 sec
            and you predict that we will play good defense and make the winning shot?

            please...we should put someone on the foul line when we still have time
            If they miss shot, then we have opportunity to win the game
            If they make 2 free throws ,then we can try to attack the basket and we still !have time! to change the game
            If you let the 27 sec down to 3 sec and give Bucks time to make play? you can get things worse and no choices in the end of the game
            Last edited by Kamiyohk; 11-05-2010, 09:29 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
              1. I don't feel Posey is the defender he use to be. Too slow, and doesn't move laterally very well. Only reason he is on the floor is because he can shoot the 3, let's just be honest.

              2. I have to respectfully disagree. If you watched the game there was like a 2 seconds difference between the shot clock and game clock (not exaggerating, have the game DVRed). If the Bucks were smart they would have just held the ball to the final second and threw the ball in the air as the game would've been over. We actually lucked out Salmons attempted to drive to the lane. Too bad Roy was charged with a block
              Thats our best team defender MD let Salmons drive to the lane

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                Originally posted by flox View Post
                Yeah, sure, because my posts are the predictable ones.
                Originally posted by Mackey_Rose

                That's the percentage play. We had been playing good defense all game, I thought we would have gotten them stopped as well. Not to mention our system dictates that we rarely take more than 1 second off the clock anyway before jacking up a contested three, so that's a play we are used to, and I imagine that the great Mike Dunleavy would have hit the game winner.

                He may be shooting currently like he's drop kicking it at the rim, but the fact is, the guy is a dead eye shooter. I expect every attempt to find nothing but net. It will happen soon. He will use his superior IQ to will the ball in with his super powered telekinetic basketball mind.

                I think the best thing we can take away from tonight is that Mike Dunleavy's team defense allowed us to hold them to only 94 points. Sure John Salmons absolutely killed him 1-on-1, but that's only half of defense, and most definitely doesn't tell the whole story. Anyone who spends time worrying about his on-the-ball defense is just not paying enough attention. Great job Mike, you really energized us defensively tonight.
                I wrote that like 5 minutes before this thread got going.

                I went over the top for sarcastic effect, but you certainly didn't fail to deliver.

                I don't want to turn this too personal so I'm done tonight, but good luck defending JOB after that masterpiece. It obviously wasn't totally his fault we lost, but he made sure you and your cohorts have your work cut out for you.
                Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 11-05-2010, 09:42 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  It is elementary level stuff. You extend the game as long as you can. Say Roy didn't foul and they ran the clock down and took a shot with 3 seconds left. That gives us probably 1.5 seconds at the most to attempt a winner. Not going to be a high percentage shot.

                  As soon as Granger missed his shot we should have fouled.
                  As a genious myself, I recognize this trait in others. You sure, are a genious. Extend the game, make them hit their free throws and give us shot clock to actually make plays instead of an inbounds for a whack three point attempt that didn't even help.
                  Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                    Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
                    As a genious myself, I recognize this trait in others. You sure, are a genious. Extend the game, make them hit their free throws and give us shot clock to actually make plays instead of an inbounds for a whack three point attempt that didn't even help.
                    When you make fouls, You are expecting that they will miss their free throws right?
                    So how about if they miss the free throws?
                    Even they make the free throws, we still have time to change the game
                    If they make shot, 3 sec? thats why we have no time to make changes at the end of the game tonight

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                      Originally posted by Kamiyohk View Post
                      1. You can blame everything about lose a game, but let me told you that:
                      We have 19 TO tonight BUT Bucks also have 15 TO
                      But we are better team than Bucks(they have no Boguts on the court)
                      So it's the reason why we lose the game because of more 4 TO?
                      We can win the game easier when the team make right rotaion and put george,josh,tyler on the court
                      We shouldn't lose tonight game anyway!
                      Turnovers lead to fast break oppotunities and high percentage shots. In that context 4 turnovers is huge. We had 19 points off of there 15 turnovers. They had 28!!! off of our 19. Thats a 9 point difference- there's the game right there. In addition, they also had 8 more shot attempts than us- trace that to the turnovers.
                      Originally posted by Kamiyohk View Post
                      2. It's just a poor decison! Even i don't agree about the last call, but we should make foul to stop the game anyway in that moment.
                      only 1-3 sec different between shot clock and game time
                      so it's tough to play defense and make winning shot
                      See below. See also the last part of this post
                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost...7&postcount=27

                      Originally posted by IndyMac View Post
                      There was a 3 sec difference in the clocks, so I thought it was the right call not to foul. We had been playing good defense on them the last few minutes. I don't know why you can be so upset about this though, I mean we DID end up fouling them with 5.5 sec left and they made both shots to clinch the game. I would like to know what difference you think it would have made if we had fouled them sooner? By not fouling, you at least give yourself a shot to tie or win if you get a stop.
                      Agreed

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                        Originally posted by IndyMac View Post
                        There was a 3 sec difference in the clocks, so I thought it was the right call not to foul. We had been playing good defense on them the last few minutes. I don't know why you can be so upset about this though, I mean we DID end up fouling them with 5.5 sec left and they made both shots to clinch the game. I would like to know what difference you think it would have made if we had fouled them sooner? By not fouling, you at least give yourself a shot to tie or win if you get a stop.

                        Once again, after watching the replay. There was 2 seconds between shot clock and game clock. There was still 3 seconds on the shot clock when Salmons was fouled at 5 seconds. Even Denari and Quinn were saying, "You've got to foul here" as the clock kept winding down.

                        As I stated before, the Bucks could have likely waited until 1 second on the shot clock and threw the ball in the air. Game would have been over.

                        If anyone else DVRed the game, please post and verify

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                          Originally posted by Kamiyohk View Post
                          When you make fouls, You are expecting that they will miss their free throws right?
                          So how about if they miss the free throws?
                          Even they make the free throws, we still have time to change the game
                          If they make shot, 3 sec? thats why we have no time to make changes at the end of the game tonight
                          Sorry if I am misunderstanding, but I am saying the same thing as you...we are in the same boat. I wanted them to foul when we had 30 sec left and extend the game so we had time to get off a decent shot in the event they miss their free throws. Maybe you knew I was in agreement, I just didn't understand your post. We're good though brother.
                          Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                            I'm not saying it's always the right call, but in this game it was. We had been pressuring them on defense and gotten them to turn the ball over, why not let the defense try to do it again? O'Brien gave his players a chance to get a stop or turnover and give themselves a chance to tie or win the game. If the call on Roy goes the other way then we have the ball with a chance. Give Milwaukee credit, they didn't turn it over, got the foul and made the free throws. I would rather trust my players to make a play than to hope the other team fails to make free throws that will clinch a win.

                            Look if you want to question O'Brien, that's fine with me because I'm not going to defend him. I can't stand him and think he's a bad coach. And there are certainly times where it is better to foul and try to extend the game. But I think you guys are focused on the wrong thing, there were many more important decisions made during and before the game that contributed much more to our losing the game.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                              It is elementary level stuff. You extend the game as long as you can. Say Roy didn't foul and they ran the clock down and took a shot with 3 seconds left. That gives us probably 1.5 seconds at the most to attempt a winner. Not going to be a high percentage shot.

                              As soon as Granger missed his shot we should have fouled.
                              Most game winners aren't going to be high percentage shots anyway- it's why you don't foul. And if we only have to make a two instead of a three that's much better for us. As for 1.5 seconds- isn't that the same amount of time it took for Granger to nail that game winner against the Suns anyway? 1.5 seconds is plenty of time.


                              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                              1. I don't feel Posey is the defender he use to be. Too slow, and doesn't move laterally very well. Only reason he is on the floor is because he can shoot the 3, let's just be honest.
                              He certainly isn't the best option we have and he's definitely lost a step- but I feel like he's pretty decent systematically, can make some big shots and stretch the floor well, and doesn't make as many fouls or mistakes as our other options. Would I like a better 4/5? Absolutely. Do I see why he's still given minutes over Tyler and McRoberts? Yes.
                              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                              2. I have to respectfully disagree. If you watched the game there was like a 2 seconds difference between the shot clock and game clock (not exaggerating, have the game DVRed). If the Bucks were smart they would have just held the ball to the final second and threw the ball in the air as the game would've been over. We actually lucked out Salmons attempted to drive to the lane. Too bad Roy was charged with a block
                              I think we could have caught the ball, took a timeout, and got a shot off left. But I see your point. Still, I think it's too risky not to take a shot there and let them do what you described- if they get caught for a 24second call it's one of the worst things possible. I don't think they take that risk.

                              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                              I wrote that like 5 minutes before this thread got going.

                              I went over the top for sarcastic effect, but you certainly didn't fail to deliver.

                              I don't want to turn this too personal so I'm done tonight, but good luck defending JOB after that masterpiece. It obviously wasn't totally his fault we lost, but he made sure you and your cohorts have your work cut out for you.
                              Fair enough. The negativity I don't think is warranted, but fair enough.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Very disappointed about the Coach.....

                                Originally posted by IndyMac View Post
                                I'm not saying it's always the right call, but in this game it was. We had been pressuring them on defense and gotten them to turn the ball over, why not let the defense try to do it again? O'Brien gave his players a chance to get a stop or turnover and give themselves a chance to tie or win the game. If the call on Roy goes the other way then we have the ball with a chance. Give Milwaukee credit, they didn't turn it over, got the foul and made the free throws. I would rather trust my players to make a play than to hope the other team fails to make free throws that will clinch a win.

                                Look if you want to question O'Brien, that's fine with me because I'm not going to defend him. I can't stand him and think he's a bad coach. And there are certainly times where it is better to foul and try to extend the game. But I think you guys are focused on the wrong thing, there were many more important decisions made during and before the game that contributed much more to our losing the game.
                                Agreed. We shouldn't have even been in the position we were at the end of the game. Point is though, we were. You TRUSTED the defense to make the stop, I on the other end trusted the D but DID NOT trust the offense to get a good shot if we did make the stop so I was in favor of fouling so that we could maybe increase our odds by getting a couple shots at the hoop.

                                If we had taken care of the ball and been able to hit a lick in the second hald we would have won this game by a significant margin. Alas, nevermore.
                                Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X