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

Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

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

  • Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

    Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris
    Written by thunderbird1245

    Link

    Tonight we head west to Lawrence Kansas, to put the brash forward from Kansas Marcus Morris under the 2011 NBA draft microscope. Previously in this years series I have broken down Alec Burks, Klay Thompson, Tristan Thompson, and Chris Singleton….you can read those profiles elsewhere on Pacersdigest if you haven’t already.

    Along with his twin brother Markieff, Marcus Morris led Bill Self’s Kansas Jayhawks to the number one ranking in all of college basketball this year, only to have his team upset in the NCAA tournament before reaching the final four. Still, this was a banner year for Morris, as he played extremely well for one of the most high profile teams in the nation.

    Morris checked in at the NBA draft combine at a solid 230lbs, measuring out* at just under 6’9. He has relatively short arms for a player of that size, only having a wingspan of 6’10. While this is somewhat of a concern, it certainly will not keep him from being drafted in the upper half of the first round of this year’s draft I don’t believe.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————

    For some weird unknown reason, Morris seems determined to think of himself as a perimeter player, a “3″ the modern day basketball parlance. I have no clue why he feels so strongly about that, but others in the past have felt that way as well, oddly obsessed with the position they are listed at.* Jermaine O’Neal and Tim Duncan for example basically played often like “centers”, but refused to be listed that way. I find it weird and off putting that a player has such strong feelings about an issue I find trivial, but Morris clearly has a strong viewpoint about it for whatever reason. It wouldn’t keep me from drafting him per se’, but I would have to factor in his odd thinking in the matter when I evaluated him for a team. He will have to be willing to accept whatever role a coaching staff has for him, whether he likes it or not….and if he can’t do that, then he has a problem right off the get go.

    Before discussing his basketball pros and cons from a skill standpoint, I do want to mention this about Marcus Morris: The kid has a certain swagger and confidence in himself that is unmistakeable. He is the most vocal player on the court that I have seen this year on tape so far, and really seems to be very “chirpy” on the floor. I don’t know that all of his verbal stuff is necessarily all good, but it is noticeable even on tape. He is an enthusiastic teammate, and might be one of the bigger trash talkers I’ve seen on the college level. Again, not necessarily good or bad, but just be aware.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————— —

    No doubt, Marcus Morris is the highest skilled back to the basket player I think in this years draft, at least among the players I am going to be able to profile. He is already smooth with his back to the basket, being able to make moves and countermoves, reading the defense well and showing a smorgasboard of skills with his back to the rim. He is highly efficient with either hand, and has NBA ready footwork from day 1. In someways, not being a super uber athlete has helped him in this regard, as he has had to become very technically efficient in order to be able to counter his lack of explosiveness and especially length inside.

    He can turn to either shoulder, and has the step thru/up and under moves, the turnarounds, the jump hooks, and the face up/drive game going to either direction. He is well taught and highly effective in getting angles on his man before he catches the ball, instead of waiting until the catch to start playing offense like most young players do. He uses his lower body well to pin his defender, and he reads the defense well and therefore normally makes the proper move for the situation. He uses the shot fake well, has good hands, and can finish with contact. He plays with power, which is a really good sign for a young post player.

    He is a power player who will need to get angles and play smart at the next level, because he lacks the size and length to jump up over bigger longer defenders. I think he might struggle at times against bigger, rangy guys, but against people his own size or smaller he will be a tough post cover I think. His fadeaway jumper I think will end up being his best NBA move in time.

    As a perimeter guy, he is effective as well. I think he will be able to beat* slower guys off the dribble, as long as he only makes 1 or 2 dribble moves. He will be a nice player I think in the mid or high post if a team chooses to put him there, or perhaps in the short corners….but I don’t see him (regardless of what Marcus himself may believe) as a true long term wing player consistently playing at or near the 3 point line. To me that makes his true position what I would call a “flex 4″….a player who plays the 4 defensively that on offense you move all over depending on the matchup and who else you have in the game with him, and what plays or system you are using. To me if you are creative, Marcus can give you alot of nice offensive variety, and make matching up with him very difficult for opposing teams. I don’t see him as a good enough passer, shooter, or creator to play the wing consistently, but on a possession by possession basis I think he can do that for you as time goes by. He isn’t big enough to play inside 100% of the time, nor can he play outside 100% of the time either….to use him best I think you have to move him around. I think in time he will be a good enough post player that teams have to double team when he gets going.

    Morris is a willing passer if he is doubled inside, buthe lacks creativity and vision. Keep in mind that the Kansas system is very structured and lacks creativity inherently of course, but Morris isn’t a guy who is going to drive and dish to others. He will make the extra pass though, and he won’t take tough/bad shots on the perimeter….basically because he isn’t good enough out there to get a bad shot off! He is a nice feeder of the ball from the high post to the low block, which is something many teams struggle with. You will be able to play some high post basketball with Morris if you so choose.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————— –

    Defensively I think he is a “4″, but he is going to be in trouble at either position you put him at. Bigger post up threats will simply shoot over him, and wings with any ballhandling ability at all will be able to drive around him. He is “versatile” offensively, but I think he is your classic “tweener” defensively. Still, I think his strength and skill set means he can guard most back up power forwards in the league, as long as they aren’t offensive specialists who can abuse him. Against starting level players I think you’ll have to double his man to help him out in the post.

    Morris isn’t without defensive strengths though. He talks well I think, and he was a good and willing helper in the college game. As he learns what his own limitations are, I think he will be a guy who is willing to stick his nose in there and take charges. That will be important because he won’t be a shot blocker for you, as he simply lacks the athleticism to do that on a regular basis at this level.

    —————————————————————————————————————————————-

    The big giant elephant in the room about Morris is that he doesn’t rebound well at all. Those who have ready my stuff thru the years know that I try and look at guys who “get in the air first” as a future indicator of success. Well, Morris doesn’t get in the air sometimes at all. He is an old school block out/rebound preventer type of player….he will some of the time block out his opponent, but rarely does he track the ball in the air and then follow to get it. He never leaps in the air and snags one out of his area, and he doesn’t get those tough boards you have to get in big spots. He doesn’t aggressively go get the ball, instead as a wanna be perimeter guy you see him sneak out some trying to run to the other end quickly. That is fixable, but what isn’t fixable with coaching and training is his lack of length, instincts, and the lack of “quick twitch” jumping ability that he doesn’t possess….he can jump plenty high, he just is way too slow getting in the air. Add to that a lack of “want to”, and you have a pretty weak rebounding prospect for the NBA level.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————— —-

    So what do you have in Marcus Morris?

    In my view you have a long term offensive specialist back up “flex 4″, that will have a long career as a scorer off the bench for you in situational basketball. His lack of defensive ability and especially his lack of rebounding means to me that he will never be a starter on anything but a very weak team….but he could be a flexible piece off the bench in a regular role for a good team, IF he is willing to accept that type of role. If he isn’t (and I have some doubt about that until he reaches his mid to late 20′s) then he will be a guy I think he might bounce around the league a bit.

    I think he fits best on a halfcourt team who plays sagging type of defense, with a creative coaching staff and a top notch rebounder playing beside him to cover up his flaws.* He’d be a great fit for Portland at #21 (playing next to Marcus Camby) for example as a backup to LaMarcus Aldridge. Washington at #18 makes some sense to me long term as well.* Of course, he will be selected well before that……though when you really break it down there are many teams that really don’t need his exact skill set. I can see Marcus falling a bit more than you might think. Possibly the Bucks at #10 would be a nice landing spot. If he falls past them, I can see him free falling a bit.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————— —-

    Even though I think there is a decent chance he might be there at #15 when the Pacers select (despite all of the mock drafts saying otherwise), I don’t believe Larry Bird will select him. Generally, I think the Pacers value guys in this regime who have “positional” purity…..we haven’t seen Bird acquire multi positional guys much lately, he either gets pure power post players, pure wings, or point guards. Tweeners don’t seem to fit his scouting eye that well.

    If Morris falls to #15, I’d expect the Pacers to possibly move down slightly, acquire another asset, and let someone else move up to get him. I don’t see him in a Pacers uniform. Would I take him and keep him if I were in charge? No, I trade down as well….I don’t see him as a particularly good fit with our current personnel long term. I’d pass and not look back.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————–

    I think the comparables with Marcus Morris are easier than most others will be:

    Current NBA comparable: Slightly worse version of Al Harrington

    Former NBA comparison: Corliss Williamson

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird

    *beeps*

  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

    he doesn't sound like somebody we need
    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

      Him and Markieff are overrated.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

        I think Al Harrington is a good comparison, maybe Shareef Abdur-Raheem when he was on the down side of things. I do agree that he isn't the type of player we need on our team at the moment. Markieff on the other hand is a legitimate PF who could play spot minutes at center. He easily could fill Josh's role especially since he has some offensive skill, which Josh completely lacks.
        Last edited by LA_Confidential; 06-05-2011, 02:20 AM. Reason: Punctuation error. Don't judge me! lol

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

          Personally I would be thrilled if Marcus fell this far and I think Bird would take him over the other options at pf. I say this because I think Bird likes savvy offensive minded players and I think Morris fits the bill as one of those guys.

          Looking back on it I don't know if Bird has drafted one defensive minded player in the first round. Rush is probably the closest guy but he was projected to be more of a offensive fix at sg than the defensive wing that he has become.

          I think overall he goes well before our pick so its a moot point.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

            The Pacers have a better PF in Hans. Morris doesn't bring what the Pacers need in a PF... a good rebounding player that can play "D" and some 5 too.

            The PF's in this draft aren't overwhelming to me. I like the PG position in this draft, especially a big PG that can play "D".

            I'm still in the camp of trading out of the draft for a good quality big who can do the things that I described Morris can't.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

              I would much rather have Markieff than Marcus. I'd probably take Singleton before either of them.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

                These guys who are more PF than SF, but want to be seen as SFs (Derrick Williams, Marcus Morris) need to guard Lebron, Carmelo, or even Danny Granger for about 5 mins in a pick up game. Then we can ask them what position they think they are, after that?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

                  Originally posted by RoboHicks View Post
                  Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #5: Marcus Morris

                  Current NBA comparable: Slightly worse version of Al Harrington


                  when's the bandwagon leave? cuz im on it !!!! yeah!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X