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

'11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

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

  • #61
    Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

    There was no significant stretch under Jim when he was attempting to implement his strategy where this team excelled. They never "got" Jim's system because their talents are not cut-out for it...and Jim never gave up trying to force it. Frank, on the other hand, is simply playing the guys most traditional coaches would have on the floor. What Frank is doing is not that difficult. His system is simple and guys naturally pick up on it. The simple truth is, they are competing better regardless of what you may see in the standings or box score. The games are simply more competitive.

    So, is it different this year? You bet it is. The team is growing in confidence down the stretch and they believe their coach is leveraging their talents thus giving them a decent chance to win. That changes everything, so absolutely, things are different and better under Vogel.

    Now, there was a stretch earlier this season under Jim that the team played well. But Jim turned around and attempted to convert Josh into Troy Murphy. That action was the beginning of the end for Jim O'Brien in Indiana. Rather than modifying his strategy to better fit the strengths of the players on this team, he had a rigid plan that was going to get implemented come hell or high water. Like forcing a shot, total fail.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

      One thing that seems to be getting glossed over in this thread is that our youth (Hibbert, Paul G., Josh, Rush, Tyler and Collison) are playing massive roles this year. That's a lot of inexperience that is clearly growing up in front of our eyes. I guess my point is that comparing 2008 and 2009 is virtually worthless and comparing an injured team from last year is even more worthless.

      What might be worth comparing is Jim's record with this team versus Frank's. It's not even remotely close. Not in the way the team is playing or the results.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

        Besides the fact that in years that were otherwise going nowhere O'Brien still relied on players that weren't in our long term plans and gave the younger players inconsistent roles, quick hooks, and DNP-CD's... and now that has changed... But there's also the not-so-small issue where the team is playing a better brand of basketball instead of that cr... errrrrr sh.... errrrrr system that O'Brien preached.

        Regardless of who is chosen for the next coach I hope to never see anything like O'Brien's brand of basketball in Conseco ever again (unless it's being played by the opposing team because that means we stand a very good chance of beating that team).

        And I like the point made that comparing Vogel to O'Brien is pointless. It's comparing Vogel to other potential Pacers' coaches that matters. The only reason O'Brien needs to be in that discussion at all is to make sure the team goes nowhere near O'Brien Ball again....

        ...IMHO...
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

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

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

          Originally posted by count55 View Post
          Oh, yeah, somebody mentioned strength of schedule - here are SoSHR's (SoS adjusted for home/road games) for these stretches (last game in Jan thru 1st game in Apr) in each of the last three years:

          2008 - .495
          2009 - .467
          2010 - .536
          2011 - .457
          This is strength of schedule based on the whole year, right? I'm not suggesting that anyone do this b/c it would involve a lot of work, but I think it would put Vogel's brief tenure in perspective if we knew the won-loss record of our opponents since Vogel took over. I would hazard to guess that the won-loss record is higher than it was during the time that JOB was here this year.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

            I really couldn't care less about stats and numbers and all that junk, all I know is that Frank Vogel has come in, won more games than he's lost, and has us heading to the playoffs.


            I'm happy.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I've always said that if a team didn't win at least 40 games they don't deserve to be in the playoffs
              soooo, there's still a chance!
              "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                As usual, the stats may not lie, but they can easily deceive. To diminish the accomplishments of this team in the post "Difference Maker" era through the use of statistics is a disservice both to the Pacers and to quantitative statistical analysis in my view, and I would guess quite a few others, though they were put together in a strong fashion that has a certain amount of persuasiveness to it.

                However, a big difference between now and previous years is the way the team is responding in various game situations. Other than during the Lance experiment, the team has exhibited poise in several close games and won most of those as a result where before those would have been losses that probably would not have been close. They are also exhibiting the classic signs of a young promising team that is being developed (finally) in that they play to the level of the competition, winning games that are unexpected against elite teams even when those teams are performing at a pretty high level, and losing games they have no business losing by lacking focus against those teams for whatever reason. In other words, there are actual growth spurts and growing pains happening in our young players and with the young team as a whole.

                These are the intangibles that statistics cannot possibly quantify because they come from the mental and emotional aspects of the game that can only be judged by watching the game and having a sense of the subtleties and nuances of it, and that is something that good coaches recognize and cultivate with their decision making, which seems to be a strength of Vogel's, especially when compared to his predecessor.

                With some now, I sense an underlying negativity about Vogel, and almost a "sour grapes" tone about the success that is happening. Also, whether some like it or not, the franchise is in a better place now than it has been in since the brawl, and the coaching change is an important, though not all-encompassing, part of that.

                Without the coaching change happening, the threads here would mostly be about what draft pick the Pacers will end up with and that the Pacers need to be tanking, who needs traded and bought out, and burning O'Brien in effigy and planning parties for the day he is finally gone, along with anguished fans displaying loathing and disgust, or publicly disowning the team. These things, while not having disappeared entirely, have reduced significantly overall.

                But, what do most of us here know? To my knowledge, very few of us here are bloggers (it's a great gig if you can get it, to be sure), and fewer still have the ability to massage numbers to support our viewpoints the way some do.

                What most here do have is the ability to watch basketball and understand what we are seeing with various levels of comprehension, and as a collective come to conclusions through productive discussions and learning from each other, with the use of a few statistics here and there to fine tune our intuitive viewpoints.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                  Originally posted by rock747 View Post
                  soooo, there's still a chance!
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                    Originally posted by joeyd View Post
                    This is strength of schedule based on the whole year, right? I'm not suggesting that anyone do this b/c it would involve a lot of work, but I think it would put Vogel's brief tenure in perspective if we knew the won-loss record of our opponents since Vogel took over. I would hazard to guess that the won-loss record is higher than it was during the time that JOB was here this year.

                    No, not the whole year, there might be slight differences in whole year to whole year. Counts numbers are from the period being discused in this thread, End of january through end of march. What the numbers show is that this year's schedule during that time is the easiest it has been in any of the past 4 years. what the numbers also mean is that the schedule that Jim coached this season was a whole lot tougher than what Frank has coached.

                    I just realized Hicks that your numbers were only until the end of March, I thought they were until the end of each season. That was my fault in not reading carefully, but it does change things when you consider that during Jim's three seasons the pacers winning % in the month of April was .615
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-03-2011, 05:41 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                      Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post


                      With some now, I sense an underlying negativity about Vogel, and almost a "sour grapes" tone about the success that is happening. Also, whether some like it or not, the franchise is in a better place now than it has been in since the brawl, and the coaching change is an important, though not all-encompassing, part of that.

                      Without the coaching change happening, the threads here would mostly be about what draft pick the Pacers will end up with and that the Pacers need to be tanking, who needs traded and bought out, and burning O'Brien in effigy and planning parties for the day he is finally gone, along with anguished fans displaying loathing and disgust, or publicly disowning the team. These things, while not having disappeared entirely, have reduced significantly overall.

                      But, what do most of us here know? To my knowledge, very few of us here are bloggers (it's a great gig if you can get it, to be sure), and fewer still have the ability to massage numbers to support our viewpoints the way some do.
                      Let me address your points in order.

                      1) Sour grapes - No sour grapes from me, just trying to keep things in perspective as each of us decides if we want Frank back and how many of these current players do we want back.

                      2) Not sure about that, Jim coached the team to 36 victories twice before and with the strength of schedule since Jim left, if he would have kept coaching, who knows. It looked like Jim has lost the team last season too and they played pretty well to end the season

                      3) I don't think Count massaged the numbers anymore than Hicks did (in this thread). Hicks started the thread with his major point being to compare the won loss record from end of janary until and of macrh.over the past 4 seasons. OK that is worthwhile and if that is then it is also worthwhile to look at the strength of schedule during those same periods.

                      There have been many threads over the past 2 and a half months discussing the coaching differences between Frank and Jim and how everyone liks Frank more,I think we have that covered. This thread as it was started was to address a specific ppoint that I guess I off-handedly brought up.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                        So we got to beat a better NY team with Amare and Melo twice, we got to beat a way better team in Chicago once and we also got to win a game againts Boston, can somebody please remind me who was the guy guarding Amare when JOB was still the coach? do I think we win this games with Posey as our PF and TJ as our PG? Helllllllll Noooooo!!!
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                          Another incredibly entertaining thread. Amazing to watch some analyze, rationalize, and conceptualize.

                          And yet its all so simple.

                          With JOB, they never were a playoff team.

                          Now with Vogel, they are.

                          With JOB, they never were really close to being a .500 team.

                          Now with Vogel, they are over .500.

                          Is it because of strength of schedule or time of year or strength of the draft?

                          No. You play who the schedule says you play.

                          The reasons are Vogel is a better communicator, a better strategist and just plainly a better coach. He has had almost no practice time, no training camps and had to do the best he could with what he had on the fly. And he has far exceeded what JOB was able to do-in spite JOB having plenty of practice time and training camps. He plays different players in different rotations and whatta ya know...They are more successful. There is little doubt in my mind that Vogel could coach any of the teams JOB has ever coached and ended up with a better result. JOB is an arrogant *******. With little respect for his players or the fans. He publicly chastised both. If you cant see these things, then its quite clear why-you have blinders on.
                          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                            He has had almost no practice time, no training camps and had to do the best he could with what he had on the fly.
                            Well, Not sure I agree. Vogel's been an assistant under JOb for each of these teams. He already has the familiarity with the players. It's not like he's an outside guy stepping in. He's changed the focus of the offense, yes, but he's also kept the defense relatively the same scheme-wise. And it's worsened.

                            I still think he's a better fit than OB, and would be interested in seeing what he would do with the full time gig.
                            "man, PG has been really good."

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                              Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                              Another incredibly entertaining thread. Amazing to watch some analyze, rationalize, and conceptualize.

                              And yet its all so simple.

                              With JOB, they never were a playoff team.

                              Now with Vogel, they are.

                              With JOB, they never were really close to being a .500 team.

                              Now with Vogel, they are over .500.

                              Is it because of strength of schedule or time of year or strength of the draft?

                              No. You play who the schedule says you play.

                              The reasons are Vogel is a better communicator, a better strategist and just plainly a better coach. He has had almost no practice time, no training camps and had to do the best he could with what he had on the fly. And he has far exceeded what JOB was able to do-in spite JOB having plenty of practice time and training camps. He plays different players in different rotations and whatta ya know...They are more successful. There is little doubt in my mind that Vogel could coach any of the teams JOB has ever coached and ended up with a better result. JOB is an arrogant *******. With little respect for his players or the fans. He publicly chastised both. If you cant see these things, then its quite clear why-you have blinders on.
                              How dare you use common sense as a basis for your reasoning. Where is your advanced statistical analysis, where are your shot charts?

                              The only reason anyone would even bother to look at strength of schedule would be to in some way try and justify their own belief that Jim O'Brien was a good coach caught in a bad situation. Anyone else would just look and see that Frank with the exact same group of players is winning and most likely taking to the playoffs that Jim said could not make it.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                                I would agree with most of cinotimz post except the part that Vogel would have a better result with any of Jim's teams. I'd say he'd have a better record than Jim 75% of the time (yes, that might be giving Jim too much credit). The 25% represent instances where Jim happens to have the right personnel. IOW, a broken clock is still right once (or twice) a day.

                                Whether Jim's system could ever lead to a championship is in the eye of the beholder. He had some success in Boston until it was exposed and he got swept. Personally, I've never seen his style have much success in the finals. While his style is not Phoenix/Dallas, it's not the worst comparison and even with extreme talent those teams are often exposed in the playoffs even though their regular season records were astronomical.

                                While everyone may not agree that defense wins championships, I suspect most believe that it gets you there faster than jacking up threes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X