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

My short report from the game

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

  • My short report from the game

    Just got back from the game. Let me first say there is a reason theycall these games preseason games. Unless you are a die-hard I can't imagine anyone else enjoying preseason action.

    I have to make this very quick.

    Most will talk about Jackson first, but I have to start with Scot Pollard.

    He looked like the Scot Pollard I remembered from the Sacramento Kings. He was active, aggressive, and much more mobile than last season. He lookd thinner. He was much better than he was last season. His "quickness" has returned. Pollard impressed me more than anyone tonight.

    Jackson can flat out score. He just puts points on the board. I hesitate to say this, but please I mean this in the best way possible, Pacers have not had a guy like Jackson since Jalen Rose. When Jackson he is open he shoots and he can score in a variety of different ways.

    I was interested to see if Mike brown acted differently on the bench this season because of Kevin O'Neill. Well he was as active as ever, all over the place coaching the defense, up talking to players as much as last season. O'Neill sat on the bench the whole time and looked clearly like an assistant coach while Brown is the associate coach

    I love Artest, I know he missed a ton of shots, but I love watching him play.

    Tinsley does look quicker, still can't shoot, but otherwise he looked good.

    Not much else to say about anyone else.

    Pollard was very impressive people


    [edit=24=1098243823][/edit]

  • #2
    Re: My short report from the game

    Good I hope Pollard can return to his old Kings form.Is J.O. ok?On the ESPN bottomline it said he left the game because of a sore back.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




    Comment


    • #3
      Re: My short report from the game

      J.O looked awful tonight, he had no lift and could not hold his position. I guess his back stiffened up

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: My short report from the game

        Hopefully he will be o.k.
        Super Bowl XLI Champions
        2000 Eastern Conference Champions




        Comment


        • #5
          Re: My short report from the game

          I'll just go ahead & add my report from the game here.

          The good.

          Like U.B. stated Scot Pollard was phenomanal. I know, I know it's hard to beleive, but it's true.

          He was active on the boards & the part I loved the most was he was physical under the glass on both the offensive & defensive ends. He had some foul trouble but I loved the aggresiveness he displayed.

          If he can translate that into the regular season we may just see a player be (pardon the use of evangelical rhetoric here) born again.

          Of course it was just a pre-season game, but I'm telling you this was a differant Pollard than last season.

          I attest that a lot of it has to do with the Samson affect. No hair & he was weak. Now he has hair & he seemed mighty last night.

          Moving on.

          Jackson. I almost when I read U.B.'s description because my son & myself both said the exact same thing at the game. We compared him to the good side of Jalen Rose. However, unlike Jalen, Jackson seems to actually try on defense.

          After three min. of him being in the game I liked what I saw. After 5 min. of him being in the game I was going "Al who" After 10 min. of him being in the game I was going there is no way that for an entire season that Ron Artest & Stephen Jackson will be able to co-exist on the same team. There are NOT enough balls to go around.

          Look at the shots all you want, & trust me they were as good as the box score reads, but the most impressive thing to me was that he is a ball hawk on defense. He is very active & has quick feet.

          I'll be honest with you, I'd never really paid any attention to Jackson before. But if this what he brings to the team than all I can say is "good trade".

          That is nice to be able to say after haveing to continually from having to complain about the worst trade in Pacers history.

          I was kidding about the "Al who" thing. I still like baby Al & I probably always will. But I actually think this trade will work.

          A. Johnson was solid. He forced a few to many shots but overall did a solid job of running the offense & as always was solid on defense.

          James Jones. This kid needs to get some playing time somewhere. I don't think it will ever be here (there are just to many guys ahead of him) but this guy is a dead eye shooter & he is an active rebounder & defender. This tells you how deep last years draft was. He was a second round pick & my bet is that if he was picked this season he would have been a mid to high first round pick. He looked really good.

          Team perimeter defense. Outstanding. Once again it looks like we will have one of the most physical away from the basket defenses in the entire N.B.A. We slap at the ball all of the time & we bump people coming from side to side. It really was a joy to watch.

          The bad.

          Yes my friends good old U.B. & myself will begin early this year.t:

          Ron Artest gets into the bad catagory. 5-17 from the field. One of those 5 he hit was a direct benefit from staying behind with the officials to argue the lack of a call.

          It's not the fact that he was 5-17 it was the type of shots he was taking for the most part that bothered me. The more the game went on the more Ron pulled up for the quick shot.

          His defense was again great, but he can really be disruptive on offense.

          I'll go ahead & say it now, I just don't think there will be enough balls to go around with J.O., Jax & Ron.

          I hope I'm wrong there but I just have my doubts.

          Austin Croshere. I debated even metioning him because Austin did really battle toe to toe with Garnett & Olawakandi all night long on defense. But all of his shots coming from the three point line???? Come on Austin, you have to do better than that. I knew we were in deep crap the min. he came into the game & immediately faded back to the three point line.

          Once again, he did all of the small things well & his stats don't truely show his value on the defensive end but if he is going to be one of our first big men off of the bench he has got to do better than this.

          Fred Jones. Talk about 20 min. of uninspired basketball. I really thought we should run down & take his pulse just to make sure he was alive for most of the game. At the end he came a little more alive, but still. If you want min. on the floor you have to produce & last night he did not.

          John Edwards. Forget the fact that I just can't seem to root for anybody of that name I was scared when he came in. He was tall, gawky, useless as a defender & non existant as a rebounder so therefore I am convinced he will make the team. NBDL fodder at best.

          The ugly.

          Kevin Garnett. M.V.P. or not what a punk b#tch. during every whistle stop whenever a Pacer would throw up a garbage shot he would jump up & swat it like a vollyball. At first I didn't think anything about it, but when he did it three times in a row to Reggie I thought that was a little petty. I was hoping beyond hopes that dunk it in his mug but alas that didn't happen.

          Jon Benders cloths. Jamison Brewer he is not.
          Seeing Jon in street cloths brings back memory's doesn't it?

          Overall a good game & if only Shaq could blow out a knee I would feel much much better about this season.


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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: My short report from the game

            Glad to Hear the News about Pollard , I always Liked him on the Kings , was kinda sad about last year and hopefully this year he will show us what he can do

            I really glad to hear Sjax is working out and maybe I was one of the few that thought the trade was a good thing , I seen alot of people say there is no way he would score and such like he did on a poor atlanta team he played for.

            I feel better this year and I think the trade made us a better team , I guess only time will tell if that's true. I think Ron is still in a mode where he is trying to do too much on offense and I hope that will change alittle , it is really hard to be a force in this league on bothsides of the ball and one thing will always suffer. I am not going to ride are harp about Ron yet , afterall it is preseason
            Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: My short report from the game

              Peck, if you notice I did not say that Artest had a good game, I just said I love watching him play. I could have done without a few of the shots he took.
              Overall I thought the pacers took too many threes. And Ron should only take them within the offense. Meaning after the ball is moved and if the shot clock is winding down.

              Peck, I too liked the perimeter defense and Jackson helps in that area. And Tinsley has improved enough defensively to the point where he is an asset now. Cassell is tough to contain with his midrange shots, but Tinsley was a factor on him in the game.

              Interesting that we both thought of the Jalen - Jackson comparison. They both score in bunches and they both make scoring look easy. I had no idea Jackson could post up like he can.

              Peck, I too have worries about Jackson, J.O and artet being on the floor together. That is why Jackson should come off the bench. They still will be on the floor together quite a bit, but to start the game, they shouldn't and Jax will provide a sprak coming off the bench.

              A red flag was raised in my mind about the Pacers interior defense. Foster was out and that makes a huge difference, and J.O played very little and was ineffective, but I felt the loss of Al harrington in this area tonight. I don't fear the "big center" as much as I do the mobile ower forwards that Al used to guard. We'll see how that works out.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: My short report from the game

                Misc, quick thoughts...

                Why was Foster out? I was looking forward to watching him guard KG.

                I though the game was pretty boring. I usually like the preseason 'cause I like to watch the players who don't normally get many minutes. But I guess this crew of IR players don't do much for me. Except James Jones. He can play.

                I missed the start of the 1st and 3rd quarters, so I didn't get to see JO play. Sounds like he struggled. We had no inside game that I saw. In fact, the whole thing seemed more like a scrimage than a game.

                What'd Reggie do to his ankle? I saw he had it iced. Just normal wear and tear or did he tweak it?

                We got there early to watch them shoot-around. Most of the "stars" weren't out there, but Ron was. He was shooting, and shooting, and shooting. The guy just does not want to *not* be playing basketball.

                Did Ron look a little skinnier to anybody else or was I just seeing things.

                My daughter got to be in the "high five kids". When the players turned to give the books to the kids, Ron faked like he was going to give it to her, then pretended to give it to one of the other Pacers next to him before handing it over. I got a kick of him goofing around with the kids like that. Nice to see.

                Were some of the players doing the "Wal-Mart greeter" thing when you came in to the Fieldhouse? I heard that they were going to, but I think we got there too early and missed them.

                ps. Freddie (Hoiberg, that is) looked pretty good.
                [edit=22=1098278579][/edit]
                You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                - Jimmy Buffett

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: My short report from the game

                  Doug, I thought Artest looked a little thinner.

                  Hoiberg is very underrated. Everyone thinks he is only a shooter. But his defense is good, his rebounding is excellent and he is a great fit on a very good and talented team.

                  Oh yes the game was very boring

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: My short report from the game

                    I think the interior D could be our problem this year. If J.O. and Jeff are healthy with spot minutes for Cro and Pollard we will be fine. But if both of those guys are out we are screwed.

                    Of course with the increased scoring that S.Jax brings maybe it wont be a problem.

                    I agree that James Jones needs pt. That shot he was showing in the summer league is still there and we need to keep him arround. I think F. Jones needs to be converted to a pg and put James Jones as the backup to Ron as sf. He is long, can defend and rebound. Plus he has one of the sweetest shots I have ever seen.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: My short report from the game

                      I'm mostly concerned about the outrageous number of three pointers we shot - in particular during the third quarter when Minnesota got back into the game.

                      Ron, in particular, was getting the ball more than a step behind the three-point line. I know spacing is important but he's got to be closer to the basket than that.

                      I thought our shot selection overall was very poor. 20 3pt-FGA's? I'm still concerned that when Jackson is on the floor, everybody else might be racing to get off a shot before he shoots/ turns it over. Its not going to be long before Jay's_Dad@Section204 starts calling me every game to tell me that we traded one 'black hole' (the ball goes in to him, but it never comes back out) for another.

                      Who doesn't wish that Doug/Hoiberg was our backup SG - he looked great last night. Can you believe he's been around for ten years now?
                      [edit=72=1098280662][/edit]
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: My short report from the game


                        At least Jackson is a team player though, unlike Al. He was high fiving people, and chest bumping every player right before the 2nd half started.

                        I didn't think Jackson was a ball hog all that much. He was either open, or the shot clock was running down, and in either case, he's the guy I'd want shooting it out of anyone besides possibly Reggie.

                        Why the hell was out "D" leaving Fred Hoiberg open so many times?

                        And I think what Garnett did with the swatting shots was fine, and is actually a good way to keep people cold. If somebody's trying to get a rhythm off that shot then I think he definently should grab the ball.
                        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                        ----------------- Reggie Miller

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: My short report from the game

                          Originally posted by PacerFanInAZ
                          I didn't think Jackson was a ball hog all that much. He was either open, or the shot clock was running down, and in either case, he's the guy I'd want shooting it out of anyone besides possibly Reggie.
                          Arizona,

                          I think that's true. Although Jackson had a reputation for forcing shots in SA and Atlanta, I think in both of those situations one could make a point that he was the #1 or #2 offensive option. Here, he'll rarely be the #1 or #2 option. I'm waiting to see how well he does with the concept of "passing up a good shot so a teammate can get a better one."

                          I'm not saying he can't do it, but he hasn't been asked to do that at his last couple of stops and old habits are hard to break.

                          Its certainly nice to have an explosive scorer in the backcourt, again, however.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: My short report from the game

                            "Why was our defense leaving Hoilberg open" In the second half the T-Wolves did a great job on their pick and rolls, they were first able to get their big guy open in the lane with their defender sealed, so the pacers adjusted to that, but in doing so that allowed a shooter to be open which normally was Fred Hoilberg. The T-Wolves were stringing the Pacers out on the Pick and rolls, something the heat used to do so well back in the riley days

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: My short report from the game

                              "Why was our defense leaving Hoilberg open" In the second half the T-Wolves did a great job on their pick and rolls, they were first able to get their big guy open in the lane with their defender sealed, so the pacers adjusted to that, but in doing so that allowed a shooter to be open which normally was Fred Hoilberg. The T-Wolves were stringing the Pacers out on the Pick and rolls, something the heat used to do so well back in the Riley days

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X