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

A question for the OB haters

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

  • Re: A question for the OB haters

    Originally posted by Eindar View Post
    I think the team is doing much better recently, and a lot of people are saying that it's just because the team finally bought into the game plan. From that perspective, I guess I'd like to see how JOB does for the rest of the season.

    Having said that, I still feel like JOB doesn't do nearly enough to campaign on the court for his players. Rick Carlisle understood the power of getting a technical foul to let the refs (and maybe more importantly, the players) know that you've had enough of them blowing calls against your players. I feel like we've seen many more bad calls against the Pacers under Jim than we did under Carlisle, Bird, or Thomas. In fact, Jim doesn't even really get worked up or lobby this year, he just talks to his players and lets it slide. I guess you could take the stance that he's helping his young guys not be emotional and let the refs get into their heads, but at some point enough is enough, especially concerning Roy getting mugged on the inside.
    I don't remember if it was preseason or an early home game this season, but Jim DID kick the ball down the sideline in frustration and earned a technical. It was pretty fantastic, IMO.

    Most of the times I've been frustrated has been Hibbert not getting calls down the stretch. It seems he always gets hacked down the stretch (when he's in) without a foul call. In those instances I'm glad Jim has kept his cool and not dug the hole any deeper.
    Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

    Comment


    • Re: A question for the OB haters

      I'm not going to read this entire thread. Too many people have deep seated hatred for Obie at this point to give him credit for anything. Personally, I love the way the team is playing this year. My main complaint last year when I leapt onto the "Fire JOB" bandwagon was that the players looked like they had completely checked out on him. This year they are playing hard, the chemistry is reputed to be at an all-time high for this group of players, the defense is extremely effective...I mean, how much complaining can you possibly do at this point? Do you really think this team would be playing at a higher level under a different coach? I'm just going to enjoy us playing well, because quite frankly I don't care who is coaching the team, if we are playing well and winning, then I am happy. I have things that I would like to see (Price over Ford, more Tyler at times, etc), but whatever we are doing right now is working. Who am I to question success?

      Comment


      • Re: A question for the OB haters

        So 15 games erases 3 years of poor coaching?

        Jim is doing the things that we've been pleading for him to do for years now. And just suddenly, magically, he does it? Does anyone else not think that if Troy doesn't get traded, Josh doesn't see the floor? I know I do.

        Jim's hand was forced. He already plays Posey at his max, atleast IMHO, and if he had another player just like Troy, he would be getting the PT. This isn't what decisions Jim made, this is about the options that Larry took away from him.

        We still see TJ closing out games, with Posey right there next to him.

        I'm not confident that these "changes" are permanent ones. I think he just has no other options. Sure, I'm happy to see the new Pacers, but I don't think it will last if Jim is given other options. 15 games doesn't erase 3years of ****ty decision making.

        You can call it blind "hate," but it's reality whether you like it or not.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • Re: A question for the OB haters

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          So 15 games erases 3 years of poor coaching?

          Jim is doing the things that we've been pleading for him to do for years now. And just suddenly, magically, he does it? Does anyone else not think that if Troy doesn't get traded, Josh doesn't see the floor? I know I do.

          Jim's hand was forced. He already plays Posey at his max, atleast IMHO, and if he had another player just like Troy, he would be getting the PT. This isn't what decisions Jim made, this is about the options that Larry took away from him.

          We still see TJ closing out games, with Posey right there next to him.

          I'm not confident that these "changes" are permanent ones. I think he just has no other options. Sure, I'm happy to see the new Pacers, but I don't think it will last if Jim is given other options. 15 games doesn't erase 3years of ****ty decision making.

          You can call it blind "hate," but it's reality whether you like it or not.
          Oh no, it's blind hate for sure.

          Fact is McBoB WASN"T READY.
          Hibbert DIDN"T DO WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO enough of the time. And he didn't rebound enough.
          So happy you're so sure of yourself that OB is "doing what you've always wanted", the REAL coach has to ACTUALLY WAIT until the PLAYER IS READY to play..........

          Comment


          • Re: A question for the OB haters

            Why wasn't Josh ready? At some point in time you either have to throw him in the water and find out if he can swim.

            Yes, you can learn by sitting on the bench and watching. But you can only learn so much. I'm sure most on this board, given a hypothetical situation can pick the correct course of action, even within multiple coaching schemes. Whether or not they have the phsyical ability to do it is what matters, and you can't find that out by sitting.

            Let's be honest here. Hibbert didn't magically change the way he played the game, nor did he magically develop into a different player. He learned what was going to be called a foul, and what wasn't. You do that by trial and error. You do it by reptition. You do it by gaining a reputation, and even relationship with officials. You do it by PLAYING.

            During his rookie season the talk is always about how he was in foul trouble and how he took himself out of games. No, he very rarely routinely fouled out per NBA rules. Jim fouled him out by sitting him on the bench and not letting him up when he reached 4 or 5. You can play until you get 6 I do believe. I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again, but I'm 100% certain that's the rule.


            You can have the smartest player in the world, but if they aren't able to actually do it on the floor, it's pointless.

            Josh isn't doing anything different than what he did last year. But last year it was "irrelevent." Do you see a change? I sure don't. Sure he's reined in his foul trouble, but like I said, you do that by playing. That's the final step.


            As much as UB and Bill used to complain about how the "anti" JOb crowd was over the deep end, the spectrum has definately shifted in the other direction. At this point in time I'm confident a couple of posters would come in defense of Jim if I said his farts stink.

            There has to be a balance with sitting and playing. I've never said you don't learn anything from watching. Can you atleast admit that at some point in time you have to actually find out if they sink or swim on the floor? I doubt it.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: A question for the OB haters

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              So 15 games erases 3 years of poor coaching?

              Jim is doing the things that we've been pleading for him to do for years now. And just suddenly, magically, he does it? Does anyone else not think that if Troy doesn't get traded, Josh doesn't see the floor? I know I do.

              Jim's hand was forced. He already plays Posey at his max, atleast IMHO, and if he had another player just like Troy, he would be getting the PT. This isn't what decisions Jim made, this is about the options that Larry took away from him.

              We still see TJ closing out games, with Posey right there next to him.

              I'm not confident that these "changes" are permanent ones. I think he just has no other options. Sure, I'm happy to see the new Pacers, but I don't think it will last if Jim is given other options. 15 games doesn't erase 3years of ****ty decision making.

              You can call it blind "hate," but it's reality whether you like it or not.
              No, 15 games does not erase the last three years. I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working. If things start taking a turn for the worse and the players start giving half assed efforts like they did most of last year, then I will reevaluate things then.

              For what it's worth, I don't think he could have played the way he wanted in the past. Roy Hibbert made a dramatic change in his body and conditioning. He is doing things now that he simply couldn't have done in the past. Fouling wasn't the only issue. His conditioning and mobility are allowing him to be dramatically better on defense, as well as letting him log bigger minutes.

              Comment


              • Re: A question for the OB haters

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working.
                No Troy Murphy is what's working.

                Comment


                • Re: A question for the OB haters

                  Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                  No Troy Murphy is what's working.
                  It's really easy to blame everything on Murphy, but he's not the whole reason things are different this season. Don't get me wrong, he is a major reason why we are so much better, but not the only reason.

                  Comment


                  • Re: A question for the OB haters

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    No, 15 games does not erase the last three years. I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working. If things start taking a turn for the worse and the players start giving half assed efforts like they did most of last year, then I will reevaluate things then.
                    And like I said a few posts ago. Is it Jim changing or is it due to Troy being pulled away from him?

                    I know if I was on that team, I would have a hard time giving my full effort knowing that I'm stuck playing with a player/players that don't have the ability to do what they need to do. (or even the desire to do it.) I can pretend and say that I would be the definition of professional, but after a year or two, it's got to start weighing you down and really break your spirits. It just has too. You can only bang your head against a wall so many times before you start questioning why you're doing it in the first place.

                    I say all this with confidence because I see the way he uses Posey. Mackey is 100% dead on, IMHO, about how he's scared James will come in and hit his first few shots because that means Jim will stick with him longer than he should. It's the same trend, but he can't play Posey 30mins a game. Posey is unable to go that long, especially playing PF, so Jim has to go with the other options, as he should. I just wish he was making that decision himself, not being forced into it by circumstance.

                    If Troy was still on the team, and some how DC was a Pacer, and we were seeing these lineup's, I would feel a lot better about JOb. But unfortunately, I think if Troy was here along with DC, Troy would still be playing 30mins a game, and even more people would be considered "anti" JOb.


                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    For what it's worth, I don't think he could have played the way he wanted in the past. Roy Hibbert made a dramatic change in his body and conditioning. He is doing things now that he simply couldn't have done in the past. Fouling wasn't the only issue. His conditioning and mobility are allowing him to be dramatically better on defense, as well as letting him log bigger minutes.
                    All very true. But it's a progression. You don't wake up one day and learn all life's secrets. Roy needed last year in order to know what he needed to work on last offseason. Just like I expect him to work this offseason on one or two focused areas and come back even better next season.

                    Progress comes in waves, not all at once. But Roy is the one who gets the credit for it, not Jim.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: A question for the OB haters

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      First off, you're combining arguments/ideas from different posters and trying to fit everyone in a nice little square box. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
                      Well keep in mind... as I'm sure other O'Brien supporters can attest to, when you defend O'Brien you are essentially fighting a 15-front war. Notice after my reply to Eleazar I added the caveat that I wasn't necessarily directing my point there to him/her, but in general based on a lot of common criticisms of JOB I see. My fault for not adding a similar line after your quote, but I think it's clear I'm speaking in general terms here... "So sometimes the O’Brien bashers will point to our 104-142 record during his 3 year tenure as coach, and say he didn’t win enough, didn’t make the playoffs, etc. so he needs to go. But then when it gets pointed out that we could have easily been 70-176 given our lack of talent and injuries to key players, then the rationale for wanting him gone… is not that he won too few, but too many games!!"


                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Very few posters actually think Jim should have won more games with this roster. Talent is/was lacking. There's no denying it.
                      (Heh, so it's ok for you to speak in general terms about other posters? )

                      But wow, really? That is a very bold statement coming from someone who hasn't been an O'Brien supporter (I'm assuming it's accurate to label you anti-JOB?). Based on my experience on the IndyStar forums I can tell you that many would disagree with you over there. People point to three losing seasons, no playoffs, 104-142, as an overall indictment of O'Brien's coaching ability and proof that his systems were flawed. I'm relatively new on this forum so I don't know how others feel. But as I see it, this statement (assuming you are correct that "there's no denying it") essentially makes irrelevant most of the common criticisms I've seen of O'Brien. People complaining about flawed systems, disagreements over lineups, etc. Well to me, I always thought what was implicit in these criticisms was that that if only we had done things a different way with a different coach we would have won more games... But you're now saying that's not the case?

                      I mean sure, all fans will have philosophical disagreements with a head coach about this or that--but it's a very different thing entirely if we're admitting that no matter what we did, it wouldn't have mattered in wins/losses. I felt we overachieved the past 3 years based on lack of talent and injuries to key players, and others may say we finished right about where we should have finished all things considered.

                      But really I think this is a bit much if I can be honest. Look at vnzla81--he's giving you props for your comment--maybe he just meant that for the second half of it. But if he's co-signing your view that we got as many wins as possible then there is obvious double-speak. Earlier in this thread he's talking about how O'Brien cost us games last year by playing Murphy at center. Well, we were 3-4 in the games where Murphy started at center, and on balance I fail to see how this hurt us. I've already reviewed these games elsewhere so I won't rehash all of that.


                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Or we can dive back into the discussion on how he treated AJ last year, giving him DNP-CDs, then getting some minutes due to injuries/sickness/personal time only to play well, and then go straight back to the bench with the quote "Now we know what he has blah blah blah?"

                      I don't give a **** about entitling anyone. I think you make decisions based on need, or based on ability. I don't care if AJ was picked in the 2nd round, or the 10th round. If he deserves to play, he should play. If a player is injured, he should play.

                      The whole idea that just because he shouldn't play, because he was a 2nd round pick is as stupid as saying PG should play, because he was the 10th pick. You don't earn your spot by where you were drafted. You also don't get demoted because of where you were drafted.
                      Well again I'll say that I think making a big issue out of A.J. Price's playing time from a year ago is a compliment to Jim O'Brien. You say that just because a player is picked in the 2nd round, doesn't mean that he should sit on the bench? Well that begs the question--how did his playing time compare to that of other second rounders?

                      31. Jeff Pendergraph—39 G; 10.4 MPG; 405 total minutes
                      32. Jermaine Taylor—31 G; 9.8 MPG; 303
                      33. Dante Cunningham—63 G; 11.2 MPG; 707
                      34. Sergio Llull—
                      35. DaJuan Summers—44 G; 9.2 MPG; 405
                      36. Sam Young—80 G; 16.5 MPG; 1321
                      37. DeJuan Blair—82 G; 18.2 MPG; 1494
                      38. Jon Brockman—52 G; 12.6 MPG; 654
                      39. Jonas Jerebko—80 G; 27.9 MPG; 2232
                      40. Derrick Brown—57 G; 9.4 MPG; 535
                      41. Jodie Meeks—60 G; 12.0 MPG; 719
                      42. Patrick Beverley—
                      43. Marcus Thornton—73 G; 25.6 MPG; 1872
                      44. Chase Budinger—74 G; 20.1 MPG; 1488
                      45. Nick Calathes—
                      46. Danny Green—20 G; 5.8 MPG; 115
                      47. Henk Norel—
                      48. Taylor Griffin—8 G; 4.0 MPG; 32
                      49. Sergiy Gladyr—
                      50. Goran Suton—
                      51. Jack McClinton--
                      52. A.J. Price—56 G: 15.4 MPG; 865
                      53. Nando de Colo—
                      54. Robert Vaden—
                      55. Patty Mills—10 g; 3.8 MPG; 38
                      56. Ahmad Nivins—
                      57. Emir Preldzic—
                      58. Lester Hudson—25 G; 5.2 MPG; 131
                      59. Chinemelu Elonu—
                      60. Robert Dozier—

                      Only 5 other second rounders received more playing time than Price, and Price was first in playing time among players picked in the last half of the second round. However unrealistic, I guess if your preference was for Price to start every game and receive 30 minutes a night then you're probably not pleased with how it worked out. But it's like I mentioned to Sookie in another thread--there is a middle ground here in acknowledging that O'Brien played the guy more than your typical second rounder. He responded to the reality that he was better than 52. At different times he even benched a guy who was making 16 times time more in salary than Price in favor of giving him playing time.

                      So Price played 56 games--most of his dnp's came prior to Christmas. Tell me, how many second rounders not named Landry Fields are playing meaningful minutes THIS season so far? Hey, welcome to life in the NBA rookies, your playing time is going to be inconsistent and sporadic at times. That's life. This isn't even an issue.

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      You want to talk about entitlement? How about how TJ didn't even play 7minutes of preseason, due to a hamstring injury, ut yet was magically the back-up PG with AJ not even dressing. Or how about how when DC came back from his ankle injury, only to reinjure in the that game, but AJ was still sitting on the sideline in street clothes?
                      So let's talk about T.J. Ford. On the season his assist to turnover ratio ranks 30th in the NBA. But over the past 11 games? A solid 47 to 14, or 3.3571, good enough for 7th best in the NBA. And at the end of the Lakers game we have to acknowledge his poise and play-making--our final 3 FG's T.J. had a direct role in all of them, 2 pretty assists to Hibbert and a driving layup. Isn't it interesting--in general I find people making the charge how O'Brien won't play you if you're not a good 3 point shooter. Well, then why is he playing T.J. ahead of A.J.? A.J. is the better outside shooter--But T.J. has more experience, he's a better play-maker, and probably most importantly--he's been solid on the defensive end. And in saying this, I hope no one miscasts me as a fan of Ford's--he has his flaws but he's certainly proven himself to be an acceptable backup point guard option. I know that sucks for Price right now since he's the odd man out, but you can play this game with any team--look at how that deserving 3rd stringer is getting shafted and treated unfairly! Again, this isn't even criticism of Jim O'Brien. I like A.J. and all, but his time will come--if not this season then next.


                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Yeah, you're right. I'm sure those last 22 games completely changed their self-identity that was established from the prior 60 games.
                      If your entire teams identity is shaped, because of 22 games, then there are a lot bigger problems going on.
                      Well you seem to overlook/forget that O'Brien's Pacers, on balance, have played hard throughout the past 3 years. This season is just a continuation of that trend. Our coach's persistent DNA is all over this team, and this is a huge positive. As fans we should be appreciative of this.

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      And if you actually take a look at some of the box scores from those 22 games, I think you'd be interested to see who was actually playing.

                      Here is just some random sampling.

                      3/30 vs. Kings
                      Josh McRoberts - 14:17
                      AJ Price - 12:58 - 3

                      3/12 vs Celtics
                      Josh McRoberts 22:12
                      AJ Price 16:16

                      4/9 vs Cavs
                      Josh McRoberts 19:35
                      AJ Price 14:41


                      I can continue, but I think my point is clear. YOUNGER PLAYERS!!! Younger players that are actually on the team this year getting minutes!!!!

                      No, I'm not saying AJ Price and/or McRoberts makes or breaks the team. I'm saying this season is just a continuation of what started last season.

                      The 12-10 finish is closer to the infamous 5 game winning streak, and what is happening this year. You know, the EXACT things we *****ed and moaned about, saying Jim should be doing when Josh/AJ was planted on the bench.

                      That 12-10 record proves MY point. Not yours.
                      Well, I've demonstrated that your general point about how Price should have received consistent starter's minutes was an unrealistic one, but he did play more than your typical second rounder. Brandon Rush led our team in minutes played last season. I've gone on the record as saying Hibbert would not have played 25 minutes per game on most teams. And look at Chris Mannix's tweet yesterday after talking with a scout:

                      ChrisMannixSI

                      Scout on Roy Hibbert: "I wondered all last season why the hell they kept throwing the ball into this kid. Now I know why." about 23 hours ago via web

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post

                      Progress comes in waves, not all at once. But Roy is the one who gets the credit for it, not Jim.
                      Well, we agree on about 80% of this. Sure, give Roy most of the credit for putting in all of the hard work. But I will repeat my view: 90% of why we are a much improved defensive team this year can be directly attributed to Roy's improved agility--leading to better rebounding and challenging of shots--and this is due to his dropping from 14% to 8% body fat. And I fail to see how that drop from 14% to 8% would have happened if we had more of a "player coach" in here who coddles and excuses and wasn't so direct. O'Brien had to have told him, "Hey Roy, we need you to get lean and mean. The status quo is unacceptable, you can't average 8.2 boards per 36 and expect to be a full-time starting center in this league. It doesn't work that way." That's my hunch. I'm sure Big Roy would have still worked hard, but he's not going to go to such extreme and obsessive measures to completely remake his body without direct prodding from the coach. Instead, people wanted it backwards--let's send the message to him that his current frame was acceptable, let's lie and pretend it was fine and let's enable him to remain as he was and revolve the entire offense around him, too much, too soon. Nevermind how he wasn't ready and didn't have the conditioning for it then. Even last night on FS LA--After 26 minutes of playing time the Lakers announcers noted the obvious: "Roy looks gassed." They later noted that O'Brien had done a good job of keeping him fresh for the final few minutes by spotting him 2 or 3 minutes here and there. Roy was not ready to handle the burden of being a consistent #2 option last year and there's no getting around that.

                      We truly have a great example of player development here with Hibbert--there's a great chance a second Pacer in 3 years will win Most Improved Player Award--This guy was a project center when he came in... But if you're going to put your foot down and say the coach deserves no credit, then there's no point in having these discussions about whether or not the Coach has been successful at player development. When players perform below your expectations, blame the coach. When it's a success story, the coach deserves no credit. So there's no point to the debate then. It becomes futile. And even if you thought it was ugly how the sausage was made--how can you argue with where Hibbert is at right now? He is playing at an unbelievable level--he can even be a threat as a passer from the high post now thanks to O'Brien.

                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      DonSwanson

                      When it comes to coaches you have to separate the play of individual players from the coaches, especially at the NBA level. Consider that Rush was never once in Indy or with anyone from the team all summer. How much affect do you think the coach can have if they are on opposite sides of the country? His improvement didn't happen under JOB it happened on his own away from the team.

                      What you can judge a coach on is how he uses players, and which players he uses.
                      Well, Rush led the team in minutes last season, yes? And I'm sure that O'Brien encouraged Rush to focus on his ball-handling and to improve his ability to drive to the basket. Yet others prefer to run with, "he lost the team." How could he have lost the team if all of these guys like Hibbert, McRoberts and Rush are having incredible summers? They understood that their preparation would have to be top notch, and I think it's fair to say that O'Brien played a pivotal role in instilling this ethic in the team. But again it goes back to the Hibbert example--there is no point in having these discussions with respect to a coach's ability at player development, if people won't give him credit when players make significant progress.


                      And my overarching point on the 12-10 is that it happened after O'Brien said "Irrelevant, do it in a winning effort." In other words, he sent the message: with our preparation and approach, let there be no misunderstanding--We are playing to win these games. No coddling, no excuses, no 1-23 crap. We are going to build something positive headed into next season. And now we see how this "fight like wolves" mentality has carried over and we are enjoying the fruits of this mindset this season...

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Please tell me how playing Troy Murphy 30+mins last year benefited THIS team, THIS year. It's impossible to do. Troy Murphy can't even get off the freaking bench in NJ but when he's here, he's dubbed the 2nd most valuable player on the squad.
                      Last year we had Murphy, faults and all. But on a team anemic on the offensive end, we needed points to come from somewhere! And Murphy, like him or dislike him, was the better offensive player than McRoberts. Murphy He was 3rd best in the NBA in effective field goal % 08-09. And as I've noted before, we were tied for 4th best opponent two point field goal % last season, even with cumbersome Hibbert and Murphy. Our problem was rebounding, and this was Murphy's strength. And really-- how was O'Brien supposed to know that he wouldn't be here this year?? He's not psychic.

                      And based on a common criticism I see of O'Brien, about how he doesn't adapt well to players... Hey, maybe it's Avery Johnson who is poor at adapting and utilizing Murphy's strengths . This Murphy example really speaks to how O'Brien is adept at getting more out of less. He nearly got a murphleavy ballclub to the playoffs for crying out loud, and would have succeeded if not for the injuries. And then you get into the hypothetical--if you don't keep Murphy's value as high as possible, there's no guarantee that we would have been able to pull off the trade for Collison. Hey, perhaps NJ would have preferred to keep Lee. Murphy's curb appeal would have surely been much lower without O'Brien getting the most out of him. It goes back to Mannix's 500 foot view of things:

                      ChrisMannixSI

                      Jim O'Brien has earned an extension in Indiana. Hibbert backbones a top-10 D and Indy proved in LA when healthy, they are tough to beat about 23 hours ago via web

                      ChrisMannixSI

                      The anti-O'Brien extension is puzzling. He took over a train wreck. Was decimated by injuries. Coached up Hibbert. Has team on right path. about 19 hours ago via ÜberTwitter




                      And finally, did you hear what McRoberts said after we lost the OKC game?

                      “When it comes right down to it, that’s what we’re out there for, to win ball games,” said forward Josh McRoberts, who had 13 points and eight rebounds. “We are confident that we can play with anybody. But that’s not enough. You’ve got to win against anybody.”

                      Translation: Irrelevant--do it in a winning effort.

                      Hmmm, where do you think he learned this from? The recent IndyStar article on McRoberts portrayed him as someone who came over with a bit of a bad attitude, inflated ego, etc, someone who needed to be broken down and built back up. And as I note in my Case for JOB, McRoberts did get an opportunity to START games early last season--how about the game at NY--he gets outrebounded by 5-9 Nate Robinson, and the team loses by 43 points. Bottom line--regardless of your feeling as to why, Josh McRoberts, at 23, is STARTING for us. How many other teams would Josh McRoberts be starting for right now? Not many.

                      Comment


                      • Re: A question for the OB haters

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Why should I give him praises when he's starting to do the things we've been *****ing and screaming for him to do for the past 3 years now?
                        This.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: A question for the OB haters

                          DonSwanson,

                          You may make many great points, but unless I'm getting paid to do it, or am being tested on it later in the semester, there is no way I'm going to waste my time reading such lengthy diatribes.

                          Brevity is not a bad thing.

                          Comment


                          • Re: A question for the OB haters

                            Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post

                            Well again I'll say that I think making a big issue out of A.J. Price's playing time from a year ago is a compliment to Jim O'Brien. You say that just because a player is picked in the 2nd round, doesn't mean that he should sit on the bench? Well that begs the question--how did his playing time compare to that of other second rounders?

                            31. Jeff Pendergraph—39 G; 10.4 MPG; 405 total minutes
                            32. Jermaine Taylor—31 G; 9.8 MPG; 303
                            33. Dante Cunningham—63 G; 11.2 MPG; 707
                            34. Sergio Llull—
                            35. DaJuan Summers—44 G; 9.2 MPG; 405
                            36. Sam Young—80 G; 16.5 MPG; 1321
                            37. DeJuan Blair—82 G; 18.2 MPG; 1494
                            38. Jon Brockman—52 G; 12.6 MPG; 654
                            39. Jonas Jerebko—80 G; 27.9 MPG; 2232
                            40. Derrick Brown—57 G; 9.4 MPG; 535
                            41. Jodie Meeks—60 G; 12.0 MPG; 719
                            42. Patrick Beverley—
                            43. Marcus Thornton—73 G; 25.6 MPG; 1872
                            44. Chase Budinger—74 G; 20.1 MPG; 1488
                            45. Nick Calathes—
                            46. Danny Green—20 G; 5.8 MPG; 115
                            47. Henk Norel—
                            48. Taylor Griffin—8 G; 4.0 MPG; 32
                            49. Sergiy Gladyr—
                            50. Goran Suton—
                            51. Jack McClinton--
                            52. A.J. Price—56 G: 15.4 MPG; 865
                            53. Nando de Colo—
                            54. Robert Vaden—
                            55. Patty Mills—10 g; 3.8 MPG; 38
                            56. Ahmad Nivins—
                            57. Emir Preldzic—
                            58. Lester Hudson—25 G; 5.2 MPG; 131
                            59. Chinemelu Elonu—
                            60. Robert Dozier—

                            Only 5 other second rounders received more playing time than Price, and Price was first in playing time among players picked in the last half of the second round. However unrealistic, I guess if your preference was for Price to start every game and receive 30 minutes a night then you're probably not pleased with how it worked out. But it's like I mentioned to Sookie in another thread--there is a middle ground here in acknowledging that O'Brien played the guy more than your typical second rounder. He responded to the reality that he was better than 52. At different times he even benched a guy who was making 16 times time more in salary than Price in favor of giving him playing time.

                            So Price played 56 games--most of his dnp's came prior to Christmas. Tell me, how many second rounders not named Landry Fields are playing meaningful minutes THIS season so far? Hey, welcome to life in the NBA rookies, your playing time is going to be inconsistent and sporadic at times. That's life. This isn't even an issue. .
                            1. That's not a credit to JOB, that's a credit to Price, and the fact that perhaps he shouldn't have been drafted where he was drafted as well as injuries to Ford.

                            2. I think you keep missing this point.

                            The Pacers, for much of last season, played Watson and Ford. And for much of last season, that PG rotation was terrible. (Watson started playing well towards the end) and desperatly needed a change.

                            And then we saw Price play a game, when Watson was out, and he played well. And JOB came out with "he outplays the vets in practice"

                            Which most logical people would go..."wait..hold on...our point guards are playing like crap, we have a point guard who is outplaying them in practice..and he's not getting any playing time because..?"

                            no reason was ever given for that. Probably because there is no reasonable explanation.

                            But after that first game, where Price and Hansbrough dug the team out of a hole and fans saw Price was pretty good, JOB came out with.
                            "I'm going to start making sure I give AJ time because he's going to be a really good player really soon."

                            So what happens...Price goes back to the bench for about three or four weeks. In fact, the very next game, the Pacers won in a blowout, and Price didn't see a minute of the court.

                            So we have, Pacer's pgs are playing terrible, Price is outplaying them in practice, when he got his opportunity, he outplayed Ford in the game..and yet he's still not playing.

                            So January rolls around, and Price does get his shot. And he plays quite well. JOB states he's the steal of the draft and could start for a .500 team..and then he does get his start, and TJ backs him up.

                            TJ plays okay for two games..and TJ gets his spot back, with Price going to the bench until Ford injures himself. No reason for TJ to get his spot back, he didn't outplay Price, the Pacers were out of the playoffs so Pacers should have been playing guys that would have been there, and quite frankly, the team had a terrible record with TJ in the lineup anyway.

                            So the point was never, "we should give AJ a shot because he's young" It was always "He's at least outplaying Ford, he's part of our future, and EARNED his minutes, he should be playing."

                            So who cares where he was drafted, that shouldn't have mattered, so pointing out that he played more than other second rounders was irrelevant, he was, at worst, the second best PG on the team last season, and should have gotten his minutes.



                            Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post
                            So let's talk about T.J. Ford. On the season his assist to turnover ratio ranks 30th in the NBA. But over the past 11 games? A solid 47 to 14, or 3.3571, good enough for 7th best in the NBA. And at the end of the Lakers game we have to acknowledge his poise and play-making--our final 3 FG's T.J. had a direct role in all of them, 2 pretty assists to Hibbert and a driving layup. Isn't it interesting--in general I find people making the charge how O'Brien won't play you if you're not a good 3 point shooter. Well, then why is he playing T.J. ahead of A.J.? A.J. is the better outside shooter--But T.J. has more experience, he's a better play-maker, and probably most importantly--he's been solid on the defensive end. And in saying this, I hope no one miscasts me as a fan of Ford's--he has his flaws but he's certainly proven himself to be an acceptable backup point guard option. I know that sucks for Price right now since he's the odd man out, but you can play this game with any team--look at how that deserving 3rd stringer is getting shafted and treated unfairly! Again, this isn't even criticism of Jim O'Brien. I like A.J. and all, but his time will come--if not this season then next. .
                            T.J. has more experience and is possibly being showcased, that's why he's playing.

                            Price is better at pretty much everything except ball pressure and the midrange jumper (and Price's midrange jumper is nice)

                            Which follows the pattern of last season, btw. Price was "the best player in preseason" TJ played 7 minutes. Price "never has a bad practice"

                            Exactly how does AJ Price get playing time? Outplaying guys in practice doesn't get him playing time, outplaying guys in games doesn't get him playing time. To me, there's something wrong there..

                            If Ford was simply given the backup spot because he's experienced, then that's just a terrible coaching decision. Ford should have had to earn the spot over AJ, and he never did, it was given to him.

                            If he's being showcased, then doing things such as not playing Price at all and not playing Collison at the end of games is going to hurt the Pacers when Ford isn't here any longer.

                            Regardless, with the Price situation, I'm not sure how anyone can really agree with the way JOB has jerked this kid around. And then I remember he did it to Josh, and Roy, and to a lesser extent Brandon..

                            Comment


                            • Re: A question for the OB haters

                              I appreciate the reply, Sookie.

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post

                              So the point was never, "we should give AJ a shot because he's young" It was always "He's at least outplaying Ford, he's part of our future, and EARNED his minutes, he should be playing."

                              So who cares where he was drafted, that shouldn't have mattered, so pointing out that he played more than other second rounders was irrelevant, he was, at worst, the second best PG on the team last season, and should have gotten his minutes.
                              After Christmas, Price had 7 DNP's, Ford had 35--So it's not as though Price was just glued to the bench. Ford did not play the final month of the season. So you're right, I guess I'm not really seeing the big issue here. And I guess we'll agree to disagree on factoring in draft order/being a rookie. Sometimes it's best to take a step back and recognize that it's not always an easy thing to just bench a veteran in favor of a rookie. All coaches encounter this sort of thing and usually it's going to be a bit messy. Forget about second rounders for a minute... There are plenty of FIRST rounders this season who haven't even played in an NBA game. So Price not playing at the start of last season doesn't seem like a big issue to me either. It's pretty much standard fare.

                              As for Ford playing over Price this season, I think it's a 50/50 call really. Mr. Mike Wells, who we can probably all agree is not a fan of O'Brien's, has voiced his support of O'Brien's decision that Ford should be playing ahead of Price. So while "showcasing" may be an ancillary benefit, let's also not overlook the positives that Ford has given us. All too often people just focus on the negatives.

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              Regardless, with the Price situation, I'm not sure how anyone can really agree with the way JOB has jerked this kid around. And then I remember he did it to Josh, and Roy, and to a lesser extent Brandon..
                              So are you displeased with where Josh, Roy and Brandon are at right now? I'm not sure how anyone can really find fault with where they are at presently in terms of their development. And unless these guys are just the biggest collection of thin-skinned players in the league (in which case we obviously would not want them anyway), I'm sure they were able to handle not getting consistent minutes right away. They seem like a resilient bunch.

                              Comment


                              • Re: A question for the OB haters

                                Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post
                                I appreciate the reply, Sookie.



                                After Christmas, Price had 7 DNP's, Ford had 35--So it's not as though Price was just glued to the bench. Ford did not play the final month of the season. So you're right, I guess I'm not really seeing the big issue here. And I guess we'll agree to disagree on factoring in draft order/being a rookie. Sometimes it's best to take a step back and recognize that it's not always an easy thing to just bench a veteran in favor of a rookie. All coaches encounter this sort of thing and usually it's going to be a bit messy. Forget about second rounders for a minute... There are plenty of FIRST rounders this season who haven't even played in an NBA game. So Price not playing at the start of last season doesn't seem like a big issue to me either. It's pretty much standard fare.

                                As for Ford playing over Price this season, I think it's a 50/50 call really. Mr. Mike Wells, who we can probably all agree is not a fan of O'Brien's, has voiced his support of O'Brien's decision that Ford should be playing ahead of Price. So while "showcasing" may be an ancillary benefit, let's also not overlook the positives that Ford has given us. All too often people just focus on the negatives. .
                                Price was benched after he started two games, until Ford got hurt. He played in some of them, because the Pacers were repeatedly blown out (and typically Price and Josh would make the game look more reasonable when they were brought in)

                                I understand the possibility of it being "messy" but lets be honest, the team was messy anyway, a huge reason for that was the PG position, and then we hear the rookie was outplaying the two PGs in practice. I'm sorry, you play the rookie, it is a simple basketball decision. And if you compare team records with Price and team record without, seems like it was a pretty good idea.

                                So I'll repeat, after playing well for a month, Price was benched for no reason, the only one given was "we liked what we saw so we benched him"

                                This year, TJ has been mediocre (although he's had three pretty bad games in a row, with the exception of a few clutch plays) but Price was quite good in preseason, and quite good when he got his opportunity to play. Is that a young PG rotation, yea it is, but it will end up being better for the team.

                                I don't think it's 50/50. Price is better. Price is younger. And Price is most likely part of our future. He's also earned minutes that he should be getting. When guys like Lance and Paul see Price play well, practice hard and well, and stay on the inactive list..I'm sure that's real motivating...

                                now if we have to showcase TJ..we have to showcase TJ...but honestly, I feel like odds are TJ is being played because of his age.

                                Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post
                                So are you displeased with where Josh, Roy and Brandon are at right now? I'm not sure how anyone can really find fault with where they are at presently in terms of their development. And unless these guys are just the biggest collection of thin-skinned players in the league (in which case we obviously would not want them anyway), I'm sure they were able to handle not getting consistent minutes right away. They seem like a resilient bunch.
                                Josh would be quite a bit better if he had played more last season. Roy and Brandon worked their butts off in the summer, but also, would be better if they had been given more opportunities. Josh would be able to avoid foul trouble, Roy probably would be less soft. (I've got no complaints about Rush right now though. But Rush got the fairest amount of minutes too..)

                                But overall, I have a problem with the way the coach treated those players. (With possible exception of Brandon if JOB could tell Brandon wasn't sober..) They may be resilient, but they shouldn't have had to deal with it. Not when there was a bunch of no-defense poor playing vets on the team that were being awarded minutes without doing anything to deserve them.

                                The Price situation specifically obviously bothers me, but it's also a bigger representation of the problems with JOB.

                                1. He's poor at adjusting
                                2. He thinks in the here and now
                                3. He's stuck in theory and not reality. (In theory, a vet will win you games..ect..)
                                Last edited by Sookie; 12-01-2010, 01:41 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X