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

Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

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

  • #76
    Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Regarding Monta as the point guard and been to much of a ball hog, I would love for you to watch more GS games if you can, he is passing and feeding the other players, if he was such a ball hog, Curry and Lee wouldn't average as much as they average right now, I actually think they lost few games because Mark made Monta the passer instead of the finisher, he gave the ball to Lee at one time and Lee ended up turning the ball over, he also gave the ball to Curry at the end of a game and the same thing happened, I could tell you that it looks like Mark finally figured out that Monta is a closer and is starting to let him close games again reason why they won the Phoenix game by Monta making a last second shot.
    Hey, I can buy all that. But can you imagine any deal where they're giving up Monta and getting back Collison? That doesn't help them at all.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      Same here. For all the grief I give Venezuela, I've got no problem with Monta. I'd love to see what he'd do while being coached by Vogel.

      But I'm not seeing GS as a good trading partner here. People are talking about trading Collison for him? That makes NO sense for GS... they're trying to get bigger, remember?
      We would have to make a 3 team trade to get Monta if we want to keep Danny, probably something like GS gets Al Jefferson, Indiana gets Monta and Utah gets DC+ pick + Tyler.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

        I also came up with this 3 way trade:


        GS gets Okafor+Ariza, Indiana gets Monta, NO gets Biedrins+ Tyler+DC+picks.

        Why would GS do it? because they need a center that can play D and block shots, they wanted Chandler and signed Jordan to an offer sheet, they also need an SF that can play D and Ariza is perfect for them.


        Why would NO do it? well by moving Ariza/Okafor they save a lot of money and they also get two young players in Tyler and DC to rebuild for the future, a serviceable big man and picks(2nd round picks+1st round pick).

        Why would Indiana do it? well they are going to get one of the best scorers in the NBA, having an starting team of Monta,PG,Danny,West,Hibbert could put the Pacers on the top in my opinion.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

          I'll make it easy: Talk this guy out of retirement and sign him:

          http://www.basketball-reference.com/...starrke01.html

          Trade him for Monta. Boom. Problem solved. Golden State gets a Starr.
          Last edited by Sandman21; 02-28-2012, 12:18 AM.
          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

          "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

            Originally posted by v_d_g View Post
            Yeah. I mean, it's incredible here. People actually think that the Warriors would let Ellis go for Kaman and A.J. Price. It's beyond RETARDED here.

            The problem with the Pacers, the reason the Pacers will NEVER get far, is that they just don't have a goto player. An UNGUARDABLE player -- someone who can get you two (or more) any time he wants (especially during crunch time) on get to the foul line. Last time I looked, the Pacers don't have anyone remotely resembling this. And, Granger's attempt at this against the Bulls last year was COMICAL.

            Once again: Ellis is UNGUARDABLE. This ain't the BRUTISH '90's any longer -- quick, athletic guards, with shooting touches, are the STARS in the present NBA. (Not good acting charge takers.) Unless you have James or Wade or Bryant or Durant on your team -- and the Pacers are VERY FAR from this point -- Ellis is not playing 2nd option. The idea that he'd be BENEATH Hibbert and Granger in terms of a go to role is DELUSIONAL. Then again, that's what repeatedly makes the rounds here.

            Kaman and ****in' A.J. Price for Ellis. Now, that's just flat out embarrassing --- especially given that those offering this actually believe it to be a fair trade.
            Who was the unguardable player when the Pacers made the NBA Finals in 2000? Don't worry. I'll wait.


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

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
              Who was the unguardable player when the Pacers made the NBA Finals in 2000? Don't worry. I'll wait.
              Isn't his argument that we've moved away from that era? No longer can you have teams constructed like the 90s Pacers.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                Isn't his argument that we've moved away from that era? No longer can you have teams constructed like the 90s Pacers.
                And why not? I'm sorry, but I don't believe "We need a Superstar" to win it all concept. We're in a market where the REAL Superstars of the league are not dying to sign with, and no one is going to hand us their Superstar without gutting our team. So, guess what? We have to construct this team like the 90s Pacers.

                This team is solid and can compete now. You all do realize that this team is 21-12 this season? If we're winning with a TEAM, then why are in a rush to blow up this TEAM for a Superstar? Not only that, some of you are in rush to blow up this TEAM in order to give the reigns to Paul George. Minus the Miami Heat and maybe the Clippers this season, I don't know too many teams that went from zeros to heros in less than 3-4 seasons.


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

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  And why not? I'm sorry, but I don't believe "We need a Superstar" to win it all concept. We're in a market where the REAL Superstars of the league are not dying to sign with, and no one is going to hand us their Superstar without gutting our team. So, guess what? We have to construct this team like the 90s Pacers.

                  This team is solid and can compete now. You all do realize that this team is 21-12 this season? If we're winning with a TEAM, then why are in a rush to blow up this TEAM for a Superstar? Not only that, some of you are in rush to blow up this TEAM in order to give the reigns to Paul George. Minus the Miami Heat and maybe the Clippers this season, I don't know too many teams that went from zeros to heros in less than 3-4 seasons.
                  I'm not necessarily in one corner or the other but you can't deny certain realities: this team has trouble scoring on a consistent basis, especially at the end of games. We can only expect that to increase in the playoffs.

                  Monta Ellis does not have trouble with scoring...at any point of the game. However, he has serious deficiencies at several other areas of his game. At the 2, he's undersized, leaving him particularly vulnerable on the defensive end (and even more so with an undersized 1, like Darren). At the 1, he's not a distributor and/or floor general. It's unclear how well he'll find other guys, how well he'll play the pick and roll with West, how well he can feed Roy in the post, etc.

                  These deficiencies are exactly what prevent him from being a superstar. I believe you are conflating the argument that we need a superstar to compete with the argument that we should acquire Ellis. The argument in favor of acquiring him, as I understand it, is that if it can be done without giving up the Granger-George-Hibbert core, the downgrade from Collison to Ellis at the 1 is worth the upgrade on the offensive end.

                  The main disagreement lies at how large you think that downgrade is (ostensibly none, in vnzla's case) and how large the upgrade is on the offensive end (ostensibly tremendous, in vnzla's case).
                  Last edited by rexnom; 02-28-2012, 02:08 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                    For the record, I'm sold that a trade that retains the George-Granger-Hibbert core while acquiring Ellis would be a net positive. I'm not at all sold that a Granger-Ellis trade would be worth it at all. At best, it would be a lateral, as many have pointed out. At worst, it would be a huge chemistry loss and a massive defensive downgrade. Obviously, the former trade is much less realistic, which is why I think we haven't seen Ellis moved yet.

                    I think Danny is the heart of the team and I think the team should treat him like Boston treated Paul Pierce. As many have written, Danny is one of these players more valuable to us than any other team.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Skip Bayless hates Westbrook and Rose at the point, he feels like they score too much for his liking.
                      Skip Bayless is a complete idiot tho...

                      As for the trade proposals that have been thrown around on here, I just don't see any way for us to get Ellis without giving George, Granger, or Hibbert, and odviously that's not gonna happen. I would be all for getting him without giving up those 3 but that's just a pipe dream imo
                      Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                        I proposed a trade which had Tyler, Kaman, and two of our first round picks going to Golden State, Collison going to NO, and Monta coming here. That is a heck of a lot more realistic than most of what has been projected here.

                        I think vzla81's idea with the Jazz makes a ton of sense as well. I would love to pry Millsap from them, but that is wishful thinking.

                        Overall, there is absolutely no downgrade fom Collison to Monta in any facet of the game, except in the locker room where Collison seems to be a top notch human. Defensively, offensively, special teams.... err.... uh. You know what I am getting at.
                        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                          I'm not necessarily in one corner or the other but you can't deny certain realities: this team has trouble scoring on a consistent basis, especially at the end of games. We can only expect that to increase in the playoffs.

                          Monta Ellis does not have trouble with scoring...at any point of the game. However, he has serious deficiencies at several other areas of his game. At the 2, he's undersized, leaving him particularly vulnerable on the defensive end (and even more so with an undersized 1, like Darren). At the 1, he's not a distributor and/or floor general. It's unclear how well he'll find other guys, how well he'll play the pick and roll with West, how well he can feed Roy in the post, etc.
                          These deficiencies are exactly what prevent him from being a superstar. I believe you are conflating the argument that we need a superstar to compete with the argument that we should acquire Ellis. The argument in favor of acquiring him, as I understand it, is that if it can be done without giving up the Granger-George-Hibbert core, the downgrade from Collison to Ellis at the 1 is worth the upgrade on the offensive end.

                          The main disagreement lies at how large you think that downgrade is (ostensibly none, in vnzla's case) and how large the upgrade is on the offensive end (ostensibly tremendous, in vnzla's case).
                          I can tell you that Monta is great on the pick and roll, him and Lee are amazing at running it, remember that Lee is not a back to the basket type of player must of his points come from pick and roll plays.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            I also came up with this 3 way trade:


                            GS gets Okafor+Ariza, Indiana gets Monta, NO gets Biedrins+ Tyler+DC+picks.

                            Why would GS do it? because they need a center that can play D and block shots, they wanted Chandler and signed Jordan to an offer sheet, they also need an SF that can play D and Ariza is perfect for them.


                            Why would NO do it? well by moving Ariza/Okafor they save a lot of money and they also get two young players in Tyler and DC to rebuild for the future, a serviceable big man and picks(2nd round picks+1st round pick).

                            Why would Indiana do it? well they are going to get one of the best scorers in the NBA, having an starting team of Monta,PG,Danny,West,Hibbert could put the Pacers on the top in my opinion.

                            As much as I'd love to see this go down, I just don't see why NO does this lol. DC+Tyler and picks?

                            Then I saw they received Al Farooq Aminu, and Kaman as a part of the CP3 deal and figured they MAY be dumb enough to make this move lol.

                            On the serious side however, that starting 5 would be very well balanced and a serious ECF contender.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              As much as I'd love to see this go down, I just don't see why NO does this lol. DC+Tyler and picks?

                              Then I saw they received Al Farooq Aminu, and Kaman as a part of the CP3 deal and figured they MAY be dumb enough to make this move lol.

                              On the serious side however, that starting 5 would be very well balanced and a serious ECF contender.
                              New Orleans motivation would be to save money and get draft picks, by moving Okafor+Ariza they are going to save a lot of money, we could probably help them even more by taking into JJ's two years left contract.

                              And there is not doubt that we can beat any team with an starting unit of Monta,PG,Danny,West,Hibbert, maybe Miami is still better but after that I don't see anybody as good.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                                Overall, there is absolutely no downgrade fom Collison to Monta in any facet of the game, except in the locker room where Collison seems to be a top notch human. Defensively, offensively, special teams.... err.... uh. You know what I am getting at.
                                Collison's a legitimate pass-first point guard with one of the best assist-to-turnover ratios in the league, whereas Ellis is a shot-happy comboguard who's also a turnover machine.

                                If we played Collison the way Golden State plays Monta─huge minutes and total domination (30%+) of our offensive possessions─there's no question he could give us close to 20 & 10 a night.

                                Don't believe me?

                                Just take a look at what he did as a starter during his rookie season. That was New Orleans using Collison the way Golden State uses Monta; huge minutes (40.2), and total ball domination.

                                The end result? 18.8 ppg, and 9.1 apg, and he did it while being far more efficient than Monta.

                                Darren could do that for us, I'm sure, but is it conductive to winning? I would think most would say no. I'm not so sure current Monta Ellis is conductive to winning, either.

                                If we could refine Monta's game, get him playing under control, with less ball domination (less shots, less turnovers), and get him to buy into the team concept─all without *****ing─he could help us out, I'm sure.

                                I don't know if that's possible.
                                Last edited by Lance George; 02-28-2012, 11:13 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X