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

Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

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

  • #91
    Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

    One, Wells said there was screaming and yelling. That doesn't mean arguing and fighting. It could (and should) be all Vogel just going off on them. Watching 3 guys just look at a ball roll by them without anyone moving would warrant that.

    Second, is anyone who hates Dunleavy willing to admit he means more to this team than they thought? I think this rough stretch shows what I already knew. That Mike Dunleavy is a huge reason for the little success this team has seen.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
      But Miami does think they need better role players than Chamlers and company. It is a team. It isnt just your main 3 guys struggle so the whole team will struggle. We need better players 1-12 option wise. In time im sure Paul, Lance, AJ , and others can get better but it wont be eoght we need to add talent. Just like damm near every other team in the league is looking to add talent
      Better at the role player aspect though, not equal to Lebron or Wade. And that's only so they can be 100% the best team in the NBA.

      We are talking about fixing a 35 win team by improving Josh or Rush, but our Lebron, Wade and Bosh aren't so hot.

      And by the way, the Heat make a good example because they aren't well balanced as a team. They went for the homerun with the top scorers when what they really needed is to match a couple of different types of scorers with other types of roles, like maybe a PF that can block shots and start fast breaks.


      You swap Josh for Bosh and it helps Miami and hurts the Pacers because Bosh just overlaps Danny and Roy while Josh makes it easier for all the scoring to go through Wade and Josh.

      If you "fix" Rush and Josh then you need to go ahead and fix the other 3 spots too.


      I'm not calling Josh and Rush untouchable. What I'm saying is that getting 100% production out of your 15% impact (of total team production) guys doesn't help as much as getting 100% production out of your 50% impact guys. Fixing your stars has a bigger impact that fixing your 5th or 7th guy.


      Look, I warned people on Collison way back before he was drafted that his game was mostly overdribbling and poor passing. His assist rates with a very talented team were not good and you couldn't blame it on him not having options.

      His weakness is vision and how he thinks about court spacing. If we add to this him struggling with his shot AND a good portion of the offense going through him, then we've got problems.


      And this isn't about favorites because I love Roy, I always have. But good lord is his post game right in the toilet the last few weeks. He doesn't read the double teams quickly enough, he doesn't protect the ball on double downs, he has his kickouts deflected into turnovers, and he flat-out isn't smoothly completing his low post scoring moves.


      Danny is arm barring every single guy that defends him as he drives and has been lucky to get away with it up till now. He looks sluggish on his drives rather than explosive. He's not blowing past guys or putting them on their heels. Moving him away from 3pt bombing is not sitting well with his game, maybe because he was being converted into that so much by JOB. It's probably fall-out from letting JOB continue to preach that style of offense.


      You fix those 3 problems and then we can start to worry about tweaking up the complimentary guys to get the extra 3-4 wins.


      Originally posted by Jared Sullinger View Post
      Hansbrough went toe-to-toe with Luis Scola, dropping 17 & 10 in 25 minutes. Ineffective would be Brandon Rush doing next-to-nothing while getting lit up like a Christmas tree by Kevin Martin.
      BTW, once again I heard a Pacer player getting on Tyler for missing his switch. This was not obvious to me since I don't know the scheme, but I trust a vet when he yells out "Tyler, that's you!"

      So maybe those upgrades aren't so obvious after all. And he didn't go toe-to-toe with Scola, only half his time came against him and he didn't salvage his FG night till the mid 2nd half when they were down 26. He still took 18 shots to get those 17 points...oh, and just what was he doing when matched with 4 of 5 Patrick Patterson? Did you think we weren't watching during that part?

      Where was Lance when Dragic was blowing right past him? The bench DID NOT reign in the lead last night. They kept getting thumped too.


      Luckily I Tivo'd the game so when I get back to Indy I'll go ahead and clip up Martin's scores and we will see where all the lighting up was coming from. I have said outright in this thread that Rush did 2 things wrong - bit his jab step and went under some screens. BUT MY POINT was that George was ALSO getting lit up, just like he did against Terry. So how does that fix things?

      I feel like there are a lot of "I followed the Gamecast" coaches around here. Rush wasn't great by any stretch, but he was moderately effective on defense.

      Martin BLEW PAST COLLISON a couple of times. You know, because basketball features switches and PnR. In fact Houston specifically runs a lot of weaves and screens on the outside to force mixed coverage.
      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-06-2011, 10:13 AM.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

        Rush and Josh are your COMPLIMENTARY players. Blaming them is like blaming catsup for your s**** hamburger. The complimentary guys can make things better, but they aren't there to be the main guy.

        Who was the scoring machine next to Reggie at the 3? It WAS Person or Detlef and they were traded. Why? Because the old saying is there aren't enough balls to go around out there.

        Look at the scoring and shooting numbers coming from a WING and PF right now. Now go pull up the numbers on the scoring/FG% (and assists) from a WING (McKey) and PF (Dale) when you had Jax, Reggie and Rik starting.

        You didn't say you needed to upgrade Dale when Reggie was lighting it up or Rik was rolling.
        If we had Reggie, Smits, and Jax with Rush and Josh we would not complain. This is not 1990 and Rush is nowhere as good as McKey and Josh is not Dale. McKey would stop guys moving to the basket in their tracks.
        Our 3 scorers are nowhere near what those guys were so complimentary players on this team have to do more. And you do know that Rush will likely be gone next season (third time is the charm) and possibly Josh. It seems that Larry doesn't share your opinion of how good Brandon is nor do many people on PD.
        Last edited by speakout4; 03-06-2011, 10:06 AM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
          I'm not usually one to look at +/- and give it much time, but I did notice something odd. While everyone else was at 0 or in the negatives Price had a +13. Either that is a typo or Price should have received more minutes. I don't like using +/- to judge how well a player is playing, but in this case the abnormality is too strong to ignore.
          I like Price so this is not bias. He just benefitted from garbage situations as Thingfish mentioned. The final 6-7 minutes of that game were utterly meaningless.

          Houston played Thabeet for chrissake. Fans went nuts because at this point he's their victory cigar. They were phoning in half the 4th.


          Price needs to work up his defense still. He's struggling to stop guys or to drive them into help.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

            we were losing with O'Brien and we're now losing with Vogel - I don't think anyone should be like "well this is what you guys wanted so here you go...you're losing by playing the young guys"...last I checked we were also a losing team playing the "veterans" with JOB.

            I like this stretch - I think this shows that some people were a bit too early with their assesment of Vogel and wanting to give him the keys right away. He is still very raw. Atleast he admits his mistakes - that I can appreciate.

            Roy frustrates me. I just don't feel confident with his play at all. He looks so fragile out there in the court. All those hook shots are a bad version of Jermaine's fade aways - it disgusts me.

            this team lacks the mental toughness - they're really not "smashmouth" team - they're not tough in the head and it shows...

            All these weaknesses that we're witnessing - THEY ARE GOOD - it gives us a better understanding on what we need to fix during the off-season. For that I am glad.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

              Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
              we were losing with O'Brien and we're now losing with Vogel - I don't think anyone should be like "well this is what you guys wanted so here you go...you're losing by playing the young guys"...last I checked we were also a losing team playing the "veterans" with JOB.

              I like this stretch - I think this shows that some people were a bit too early with their assesment of Vogel and wanting to give him the keys right away. He is still very raw. Atleast he admits his mistakes - that I can appreciate.

              Roy frustrates me. I just don't feel confident with his play at all. He looks so fragile out there in the court. All those hook shots are a bad version of Jermaine's fade aways - it disgusts me.

              this team lacks the mental toughness - they're really not "smashmouth" team - they're not tough in the head and it shows...

              All these weaknesses that we're witnessing - THEY ARE GOOD - it gives us a better understanding on what we need to fix during the off-season. For that I am glad.
              The entire team coaches and players are too young and inexperienced for prime time. That's ok but I wish Larry would somehow get involved a little more.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                What if this just makes things worse though? Isn't there a chance of that happening?
                I guess who's doing the yelling and screaming. If it's Vogel, then I'm glad he's chewing them a new *sshole. If it's the players...well, we'll have a new coach to start next season.


                Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                  Well, apparently both Jeff and Dahntay were pissed because of all of the defensive breakdowns from the young guys, so I'd image they were doing at least some of the yelling. I'm 100% sure Dahntay did because I was reading that he didn't even wait until the game was over; he was getting on them in a huddle mid game.

                  Danny doesn't seem afraid to yell over things like this, so I'd presume his participation as well.

                  Before anyone does it (and they probably will), yes we're all aware that the mentioned 3 have various degrees of defensive issues themselves, but they are the elder statesmen of this team, and if anyone is going to get on the youth for their DREADFUL defense, it ought to be them. In theory, I'm perfectly fine with that.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Well, apparently both Jeff and Dahntay were pissed because of all of the defensive breakdowns from the young guys, so I'd image they were doing at least some of the yelling. I'm 100% sure Dahntay did because I was reading that he didn't even wait until the game was over; he was getting on them in a huddle mid game.

                    Danny doesn't seem afraid to yell over things like this, so I'd presume his participation as well.

                    Before anyone does it (and they probably will), yes we're all aware that the mentioned 3 have various degrees of defensive issues themselves, but they are the elder statesmen of this team, and if anyone is going to get on the youth for their DREADFUL defense, it ought to be them. In theory, I'm perfectly fine with that.
                    I did not see the game because the cable was out but who specifically was being yelled at/ Do you know?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                      Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                      If we had Reggie, Smits, and Jax with Rush and Josh we would not complain. This is not 1990 and Rush is nowhere as good as McKey and Josh is not Dale. McKey would stop guys moving to the basket in their tracks.
                      Our 3 scorers are nowhere near what those guys were so complimentary players on this team have to do more. And you do know that Rush will likely be gone next season (third time is the charm) and possibly Josh. It seems that Larry doesn't share your opinion of how good Brandon is nor do many people on PD.
                      That's great.

                      But I didn't build this team in the first place, Larry did. So am I really losing the debate at this point? Larry still hates that he had to fire JOB. Larry believed in Shawne Williams. Larry couldn't get the TJ or Dun contracts traded in a world where teams are begging to lose contract money.


                      And I'm not saying Brandon doesn't have limits. I'm saying the reason the team is struggling has more to do with the difference between Danny and Miller or Roy and Rik than it does with the difference between McKey and Rush.

                      Plus the argument was that if only George and Tyler were starting this team would be much better. Except that George and Tyler were out there together in the first half getting their a**** kicked too, and by guys like Courtney Lee and Chuck Hayes.

                      George is a better talent than Rush. George looks to be better than Rush in the long run, and on offense in the short run. But the upgrade won't be George vs Rush, the upgrade will be George vs Danny because Paul is outplaying Danny in terms of defensive effort despite his awareness errors.

                      And to me that's the bigger problem. Rush is the bench SG, Danny is your all-star. George is supposed to be better than Rush, he's not supposed to be better than Danny.



                      I'm not saying you can't swap Josh out if you are saying David West. What I'm saying is that if you get West then you must ALSO GIVE UP ON Roy. West becomes the low post scorer and you move Roy to get a role playing defender/rebounder. And you trade Rush for Mayo and trade Danny for the defensive ace SF you want Rush to be at SG.

                      This would ultimately be upgrading the main scorers, not the secondary players.

                      Heck, I was pro trading Rush for Gerald Henderson when Larry Brown was still wasting his talent on the bench.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                        I don't know.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          You swap Josh for Bosh and it helps Miami and hurts the Pacers because Bosh just overlaps Danny and Roy while Josh makes it easier for all the scoring to go through Wade and Josh.
                          This is so BS If you really belive this is true there is something wrong. Bosh would be a major upgrade over Josh and would make us a better team. Josh wouldnt help Miami more than Bosh ethier just no way.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                            Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                            I did not see the game because the cable was out but who specifically was being yelled at/ Do you know?
                            Jeff literally stood right beside us all night. He called out Tyler for a missed switch at one point.

                            Danny came off the floor losing his s*** at one point, though I don't know who his exact target was.

                            Jeff was 100% disgusted with how the game went, almost surprisingly so.



                            As I mentioned after the Orlando game where I sat by the bench, in that game Danny went full-on ballistic on Tyler twice. Barking him down for missed switches at a level that bordered on a one-way fight (Tyler wasn't really arguing back).

                            I've heard them yell for Paul to make a switch too in other games, so it seems like they are the main 2 guys when it comes to complaining about their switches.


                            I did not catch Dahntay yelling at anyone, though I think he joined Vogel on complaining about a couple of calls.


                            Roy per normal expresses his positive energy in a way that to the outside might look hostile. After Danny made that one steal and went the other way to get the foul Roy was all over him barking away, but that was 100% a "that's what I'm talking about" rant I think.


                            I did see plenty of disgusted glances among players, typically after guys covered other guys who were beat badly off the dribble.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              This is so BS If you really belive this is true there is something wrong. Bosh would be a major upgrade over Josh and would make us a better team. Josh wouldnt help Miami more than Bosh ethier just no way.
                              The problem you're missing is this - Bosh wouldn't end up being a Josh upgrade, he would end up being a ROY UPGRADE. Roy would be moved to Josh's role.

                              You think they'd just keep feeding the low post or running PnR with Roy/Collison if Bosh came in? Nope.

                              They'd use Roy as a defensive guy and work all the post(ish) offense through Bosh. Meanwhile Miami could return to focusing on just Wade/Lebron offense and let Josh just keep the ball moving and set shot screens for them.

                              It's about diversity of skills.

                              Bosh is a better player (specifically a better scorer) than Josh without a doubt, but you don't need 5 scorers who want 15 shots per game. That does not work. It never works. And it's not like Bosh is famous for how aggressive his defense is at the rim.


                              You might as well say what's holding back the 92 Bulls isn't Jordan's slump but Cartwright's post offense.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                BTW, once again I heard a Pacer player getting on Tyler for missing his switch. This was not obvious to me since I don't know the scheme, but I trust a vet when he yells out "Tyler, that's you!"

                                So maybe those upgrades aren't so obvious after all. And he didn't go toe-to-toe with Scola, only half his time came against him and he didn't salvage his FG night till the mid 2nd half when they were down 26. He still took 18 shots to get those 17 points...oh, and just what was he doing when matched with 4 of 5 Patrick Patterson? Did you think we weren't watching during that part?
                                Scola was 1-4 for two points with Hansbrough in the lineup and a phenomenal 5-7 for 11 points with the notoriously soft McRoberts in there.

                                You're right, though, that Hansbrough didn't do much against Scola (1-3), but then, Scola did jack diddly squat against Hansbrough, thus my "toe-to-toe" statement remains accurate.

                                There were only three players with non-negative +/- scores: Hansbrough, Stephenson (both 0) and Price (+13).

                                The Goons did their job for the most part. Between McBob being spanked like a misbehaved child by Scola and Brandon Rush being his usual worthless self, the starters did not.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X