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

DJ Augustin Playing Time

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

  • #46
    Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

    Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
    Vogel has said that he wants guys that can score and defend their position. That definition seems to leave DJ out. He can score, he is an offensive player, but he cannot defend his spot unless he is playing against another short guy. I just see this DJ as a starter thing more based on his college reputation than his actual NBA performance. I hope DJ has a good year, but I do not expect him to be anything other than just another guy.

    Pacers starters strength, at the end of last season, was the lack of a weak link that could be attacked and the lack of a guy you could ignore offensively. Putting DJ into the starting lineup gives the Pacers a guy that is going to need help defensively. I just don't see that as something vogel wants to do.
    It would be great if Lance actually steps up this year. He can fulfill Vogel's two-pronged test if he does the "P" thing.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

      We just signed George Hill to a 5 year, $8 million per contract. D.J. Augustin is not playing 30 mintues a night.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        It would be great if Lance actually steps up this year. He can fulfill Vogel's two-pronged test if he does the "P" thing.
        IF Lance can get it together, then it settles lots of issues. Plus Lance's size at the point makes the Pacers a dreadful matchup for all those teams that have been downsizing.

        Man, I hope so.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

          Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
          It makes sense to me. Hill is needed in the starting lineup for his defense to cover up for our poor perimeter defending big men
          What exactly are you saying here? Please clarify.

          Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
          and our offense isn't much more than pass it to West or Hibbert in the post and let them go to work or pass it to Granger and have him shoot it over his man.
          Or run Paul George off some screens and kick it to him. All four of our other starters are heavily involved in our offense, which is an extremely thing rare to find in the NBA. The reason it is so rare is because you can only have so many offensive options on the floor before they begin to disrupt each others play.

          We don't need another scorer to disrupt the play of our other four scorers. We need a facilitator that can compliment our four scorers on offense by getting them the ball in advantageous positions.

          Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
          Having 5 guys on the court who are all good scorers is exactly what we are trying to achieve and use as our strength.
          Except that is not always an effective strategy. If it were people like Jason Terry and Manu Ginobili would start every game for their respective teams. They do not, however, because unless one of those 5 scorers is also a talented facilitator a la Steve Nash, that unit will be unable to move the ball effectively, and the bench will suffer a drop in scoring from not having enough offensive options present.



          Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
          IMO Augustin in the starting lineup would just experience the same every other PG has experienced so far playing with the frontcourt players we have right now: lack of movement makes it so much harder to find the open man. It is not only his fault Collison struggled.
          D.J Augustin and Darren Collison are vastly different players. Like Hill, Darren was primarily a scorer. Augustin is primarily a distributor.

          Let me ask you a question. Why do you feel like Darren struggled? Going off of statistics, Darren had a very good season, so why do you believe he struggled?


          Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
          Augustin can be as good as a sixth man as Hill is. He can come in and facilitate offense when our starting lineup is struggling, he can facilitate the offense of our less gifted bench players and he can score, no doubt about that.

          I prefer Hill to start, but if DJ brings what I think he will bring, I want to see his minutes being close to Hills.
          Augustin cannot be as good of a sixth man as Hill is. The concept of a sixth man involves someone that is versatile in what positions they can play, and is able to effectively mesh with both the starting and second unit. Augustin fits neither of those parameters. He cannot play any other position than point guard, and he will not be an effective player with our bench unit.

          What so many people seem to not understand is that a basketball lineup is all about combining players that maximize each others abilities. While putting five scorers on the floor at one time might seem like a good idea, in reality all it does is minimize each player's skill set. They cannot all score the ball at the same time, so all of their shot attempts per minute are going to go down, which in turn minimizes their effectiveness. The same thing happens to our bench. With only one efficient scorer left on our bench our opponent's defense will focus on him, which will reduce his and our entire second unit's effectiveness.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

            Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
            We just signed George Hill to a 5 year, $8 million per contract. D.J. Augustin is not playing 30 mintues a night.
            DJ was in indiana Looking for a place he has been back for about a week or so he leaves to go back out there on Monday for good. Hill will play the two some this year trust me. Also, a playing time clause just may be in DJ's contract. (wink, wink)

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
              We just signed George Hill to a 5 year, $8 million per contract. D.J. Augustin is not playing 30 mintues a night.
              DJ is a Starting Quality PG and now the only true PG in the lineup. Given our likely 5 man Guard and SF rotation of GHill / PGeorge / DGranger / DJ Augustin / GGreen .....I don't see why he can't command anywhere between 21 to 28 mpg.....which is pretty much "1st Guard off the bench" to 6th Man rotational minutes. I can see Lance getting minutes...but I don't see him getting it at the expense of DJ.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                What exactly are you saying here? Please clarify.
                Collison and Hibbert defending the pick and roll, it never bothered you?
                I thought the combination of a poor defending PG and a very slow footed big man was the main door to enter our house of defense and I think we will get the same if players like DJ or Nash would be our starting PG.



                Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                Or run Paul George off some screens and kick it to him. All four of our other starters are heavily involved in our offense, which is an extremely thing rare to find in the NBA. The reason it is so rare is because you can only have so many offensive options on the floor before they begin to disrupt each others play.

                We don't need another scorer to disrupt the play of our other four scorers. We need a facilitator that can compliment our four scorers on offense by getting them the ball in advantageous positions.
                If it were people like Jason Terry and Manu Ginobili would start every game for their respective teams. They do not, however, because unless one of those 5 scorers is also a talented facilitator a la Steve Nash, that unit will be unable to move the ball effectively, and the bench will suffer a drop in scoring from not having enough offensive options present.
                There are disadvantages to having 5 scorers on the court as only 1 guy can score the ball, but you can also use it as a strength. If all 5 players can score the ball, you can run a play for the player who is defended by the worst defender. Most teams always have a bad or below average defender on the court, but like you said, it is rare that a team has 5 good offensive players, so that the bad defender is usually covering the bad offensive player. Opponents will think twice if they want to double team one of our players. Because every Pacer on the court can be dangerous.




                Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                D.J Augustin and Darren Collison are vastly different players. Like Hill, Darren was primarily a scorer. Augustin is primarily a distributor.

                Let me ask you a question. Why do you feel like Darren struggled? Going off of statistics, Darren had a very good season, so why do you believe he struggled
                He struggled to play defense, he struggled to find teammates. I am the last one to put much weight into stats, but the stats he produced in New Orleans as a starter didn't just come falling out of the sky. In a better suited offensive system, he can do better.
                If he had a very good season(good enough), we wouldn't have traded him.



                Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                Augustin cannot be as good of a sixth man as Hill is. The concept of a sixth man involves someone that is versatile in what positions they can play, and is able to effectively mesh with both the starting and second unit. Augustin fits neither of those parameters. He cannot play any other position than point guard, and he will not be an effective player with our bench unit
                The concept of a sixth man involves but just one thing: provide an offensive spark. Wether he scores or facilitates scoring, doesn't make much difference to me.
                It doesn't matter for us that Augustin is strictly a PG as Hill or George can (continue to) play the SG position.
                Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                What so many people seem to not understand is that a basketball lineup is all about combining players that maximize each others abilities. While putting five scorers on the floor at one time might seem like a good idea, in reality all it does is minimize each player's skill set. They cannot all score the ball at the same time, so all of their shot attempts per minute are going to go down, which in turn minimizes their effectiveness. The same thing happens to our bench. With only one efficient scorer left on our bench our opponent's defense will focus on him, which will reduce his and our entire second unit's effectiveness.
                I agree partly. If you have a player like Durant or Westbrook, I would also keep Harden on the bench and use Sefolosha to provide the defense. When you have Melo playing for you, you can put a player like Dahntay Jones next to him. If you have Wade and Lebron, Chalmers is almost perfect. But the Pacers don't have that luxury. They are also combining players, in a different way. Maximize team offense in the starting lineup and use good distributors (Augustin and Stephenson) in combination with athletic, quick players (Green, Plumlee, Mahinmi) and a player who can shoot but needs time to do it (Hansbrough). We had only one bench player who could score last year, it seems to me our FO learned from it and added more offense to our bench this offseason. It is not like DJ can't score.
                Last edited by MvPlumlee; 08-23-2012, 02:22 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                  Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                  Collison and Hibbert defending the pick and roll, it never bothered you?
                  I thought the combination of a poor defending PG and a very slow footed big man was the main door to enter our house of defense and I think we will get the same if players like DJ or Nash would be our starting PG.
                  Darren Collison allowed an average 0.74 points per play when defending the ball handler in a pick and roll situation. This ranked 69th in the league. George Hill averaged the exact same thing. Roy Hibbert allowed an average of 0.82 points per play when defending the roll man in a pick and roll situation. This ranked 39th in the league.

                  These numbers by no means indicate a fault in our defense.

                  D.J Augustin allowed an average of 0.82 points per play when defending the ball handler in a pick and roll situation. This ranked 133rd in the league. While this is without a doubt a lower number, is it by no means a glaring weakness. I'm confident that this number would get lower playing with our team compared to the Bobcats.

                  Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                  There are disadvantages to having 5 scorers on the court as only 1 guy can score the ball, but you can also use it as a strength. If all 5 players can score the ball, you can run a play for the player who is defended by the worst defender. Most teams always have a bad or below average defender on the court, but like you said, it is rare that a team has 5 good offensive players, so that the bad defender is usually covering the bad offensive player. Opponents will think twice if they want to double team one of our players. Because every Pacer on the court can be dangerous.

                  You are not getting my point. Yes, having five efficient offensive players on the floor at the same time will stretch a defense, but this slight benefit is not worth the huge negative impact it has on a bench's scoring ability nor the decrease in production from each individual scorer.

                  More scorers in the starting lineup = less shots for each player = decrease in production from each player.

                  Fewer scorers on the bench = less efficient scoring from the bench = decrease in overall production from the bench.

                  Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                  He struggled to play defense, he struggled to find teammates.
                  If I am following this right, you are essentially saying you think Augustine will not be able to find teammates in our offense because Collison was unable to? That's like comparing apples to oranges. Darren Collison struggled to find teammates because he is a poor facilitator. D.J Augustin is a good facilitator, and therefore your comparison is moot.

                  Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                  The concept of a sixth man involves but just one thing: provide an offensive spark. Wether he scores or facilitates scoring, doesn't make much difference to me.
                  It doesn't matter for us that Augustin is strictly a PG as Hill or George can (continue to) play the SG position.
                  Entirely not true. The concept of a sixth man having to be able to provide an offensive spark is not even close to being mutually exclusive.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                    Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                    You are not getting my point. Yes, having five efficient offensive players on the floor at the same time will stretch a defense, but this slight benefit is not worth the huge negative impact it has on a bench's scoring ability nor the decrease in production from each individual scorer.

                    More scorers in the starting lineup = less shots for each player = decrease in production from each player.

                    Fewer scorers on the bench = less efficient scoring from the bench = decrease in overall production from the bench.
                    There is only one way to find out, no?

                    For me, the positive things about Hill starting and Augustin sixth man seem to outweigh the negative ones, that's all.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                      Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                      It makes no sense to start Hill and bring D.J off the bench. George Hill is primarily a scorer. D.J Augustine is primarily a facilitator. The only thing that starting Hill and benching Augustine accomplishes is to diminish both players skill sets. Hill's scoring will be overshadowed by our other more efficient options, while D.J's passing will be wasted on inefficient offensive players. Our starting unit needs a point guard that can get them the ball in advantageous positions, not another scorer to take shots away from them, while our bench needs an efficient scorer that can take over the game for a stretch, and not a facilitator to pass to low efficiency offensive players.

                      This really shouldn't even be up for debate. Everything about George Hill screams sixth man. He has the offensive skills to play both guard positions, is a good scorer, and has the length and quickness to adequately defend just about any guard in the league. We might as well just start calling him Jason Terry.
                      I've been saying this ever since I have been here, it is exactly the reason I always supported starting McBob over Tyler, and why I wanted to see how Price would perform with the starters. Your best 5 man group isn't always your best 5 players. You best 5 man group is the 5 players who play the best together. Sometimes, in fact often, that is the best 5 players (or at least the best player at each position), but a decent amount of time you are better off playing your second best player at the position because his skill set compliments the other players on the court.

                      I firmly believe the ideal realistic situation your 6th man is your 4th best player.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                        I think DJ should be given the opportunity to show his game works better with the starting unit...and earn the spot. But from what I've heard, he's not the facilitator some seem to the think.

                        BTW, I visited the Dallas Mavericks forum just a few days ago. They were saying Darren Collison is a pure PG who should be able to facilitate their offense better than the alternatives.

                        So, what I'm saying is that assuming you have even a cheap version of Jason Kidd, doesn't mean you have that. It's easy to assume the new guy has those skills, but you would be surprised at how difficult those players really are to find.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          I think DJ should be given the opportunity to show his game works better with the starting unit...and earn the spot. But from what I've heard, he's not the facilitator some seem to the think.

                          BTW, I visited the Dallas Mavericks forum just a few days ago. They were saying Darren Collison is a pure PG who should be able to facilitate their offense better than the alternatives.

                          So, what I'm saying is that assuming you have even a cheap version of Jason Kidd, doesn't mean you have that. It's easy to assume the new guy has those skills, but you would be surprised at how difficult those players really are to find.
                          The difference is that Augustin has the numbers (6+ assists pr/gm) to back up the claim. Now obviously stats don't always show true value and skill, but the fact that DJ could average that many assists on THAT team definitely screams pure PG. Also, though DJ is a player that looks to take some shots, he has the vision that someone like DC lacked. Most scouting reports I've read on Augustin described him as a pass first type of guy.

                          NOBODY should expect the second coming of J Kidd lol, but a guy that can pass to the open man both in half court sets and on the break is something we have lacked.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            The difference is that Augustin has the numbers (6+ assists pr/gm) to back up the claim. Now obviously stats don't always show true value and skill, but the fact that DJ could average that many assists on THAT team definitely screams pure PG. Also, though DJ is a player that looks to take some shots, he has the vision that someone like DC lacked. Most scouting reports I've read on Augustin described him as a pass first type of guy.

                            NOBODY should expect the second coming of J Kidd lol, but a guy that can pass to the open man both in half court sets and on the break is something we have lacked.
                            I must say that I do expect more natural PG skills than either DC or Hill. There is nothing natural about their PG skills. What position did Hill play at IUPUI. Wasn't it shooting guard?

                            I do think with DJ he's a more natural PG....but that's not what I've read from people closer to his game. I hope what I read was wrong...

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: DJ Augustin Playing Time

                              He and Stevenson will have equal playing time
                              Smothered Chicken!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X