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

Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

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

  • Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

    Here is pretty much all you need to know about this game. In the last 5:30 we scored 2 points, both from the free throw line. This is a common theme with our club and has been all season long, we just go through such long extended droughts that I don’t care how good your defense is you are not going to win games doing that.

    You won’t beat bad teams playing like that and you are lucky if you don’t get a 20 point loss put on you by really good teams, which Oklahoma City is.

    There is no shame in losing to the Thunder, I think if we were all honest if we looked at the schedule prior to the season even with Danny here we all pretty much had this written off as a loss. But its games like this that make those Toronto, Minnesota & Charlotte games so hard to swallow.

    We have now dropped to 9th in the East and sadly two full games back of Chicago for the Central division lead. I know it’s early in the season but we have to be mindful of our position if we want any kind of home court for the playoffs playing a lower seed instead of being the sacrificial lamb to one of the top 3 teams.

    There really isn’t a lot to say about this game, we actually didn’t play badly. I mean sure there were things I would like to have seen us do differently, like not benching Lance to end the game. But at the end of the day Durant & Westbrook just took over, like they do against several teams.

    Yes we all saw what happened to Roy, again. I was very surprised when Frank benched him for the rest of the game in favor of Ian. I wasn’t opposed to it mind you but I was surprised.

    At this point in time the only thing we can do is wait for this to pass and just pray that this is not the new normal for Roy.

    Here is how pathetic our bench has been all season. I have to look at this 8 point game from Gerald Green and pretend like this was a good game for him. I mean in the grand scheme of things he didn’t play poorly although I don’t feel he did anything to merit playing at the end of the game. But I think the expectations’ coming into the season was a little higher than this.

    West was his usual problematic self for our club and Tyler was his usual ineffective self as well. This is a trend for both players with the later not being a good thing.

    Oh speaking of the bench did you know that Kevin Martin by himself outscored our entire bench? It’s true he had 24 and our entire bench produced 20 points.

    Tonight let’s just do the good the bad and the ugly.

    The Good:

    David West once again produced for our club. He ran out of gas at the end of the day and only contributed 2 points in the 4th (I think) but OKC did a very good job of denying him the ball and when he did get it they rushed two defenders at him to make him give it up quickly. I have a real concern for the min. he is having to absorb right now, I can’t blame Frank at all because honestly the guy is our only real consistent scorer and Hansbrough has been absolute garbage lately. But I just don’t know how long he can continue at this pace.

    Paul George had another good night playing against one of the premier players in the NBA. I don’t care that he got blocked by Ibaka, what I do care about is that he had the tenacity to drive and attempt to ram that down Ibaka throat. It’s the NBA your going to get blocked but more often than not you can end up at the line or if not you will have a spectacular dunk or miss either way. I know he is going to get a lot of credit for what he did on Durant in the first half and he should but there were a few times I saw Lance on Durant and it worked out just as well. BTW that fast break he ran with Lance was superb.

    Lance Stephenson had a really good game. I have no idea why he was not in there at the end instead of Green. We desperately needed someone who could make something out of nothing in that case and Lance is one of those types of players. Frank may have been afraid that he is also one of those types of players who will make a massive mistake as well but in this case I think the tradeoff would have justified it. Either way I was proud of Lance for recognizing that Martin is a horrid defender and attacked him whenever he could. Also as I said above there were a few times that Lance got Durant on a switch and honestly I can’t think of one time Durant burnt him. Good overall game from Lance.

    The Bad:

    Tyler Hansbrough was just brutal. Last season they would let him and West play together so that often times Tyler had almost 20 in a lot of games. This year if he gets 12 he’s lucky and often times we are not. I guess at the end of the day he is what he is and every so many games he will drop a gem of a game on you where he comes in and causes havoc in the paint and draws fouls. But those games are getting fewer and fewer and farther between games.

    By all rights I want to put D.J. Augustin here because once again he had 2-1 turnover to assist ratio. But he did manage to slop up a couple of Tyler type crap shots that went in so I guess for him that constitutes some form of success.

    The Ugly:




    I know that we all want to put DJ out to pasture but in all honesty I wonder if it isn’t time to give Pendegraph or preferably Plumlee some run at the backup 4 spot for a few min. a game just to see what we can get. I know it will never happen but honestly I’m tired of waiting for consistency from Tyler.




    Ha, bet you thought you were in for some AC/DC


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

  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

    Peck, you use the term 'bench' when you could be saying 'the coach asserting that said player isn't contributing as strongly as the player finishing the game.' Nobody on this team gets benched. Frank needs to have the ability to experiment with lineups and make in-game changes that allow for the best chance to win without anyone getting their feelings hurts, players and fans alike. (Whether you agree with the coach's moves is entirely different, but I think that the term you use comes off as inappropriately harsh.)

    On that same note, I don't think Frank left Lance out for Green, but for Hill who played the whole second half. (He and West looked done by the end of the fourth. Not sure why Vogel thinks they can or should sustain those kind of minutes.) Green's D was unusually good, and he was playing offense with confidence. Hill, based on his play, did not merit being in the game, but Vogel obviously trusts him at the end of games. Lance being in probably doesn't change the outcome of the game either way, but that's way I read it.

    DJ actually had a pretty good game, in the limited minutes he had. Not sure on putting him in the 'bad' category.

    Agreed on Paul's D. He just needs to get a little stronger to deal with the bigger small forwards of the league.

    Lastly, Tina Turner or GTFO!
    You Got The Tony!!!!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

      I know that I have been beating a dead horse.... but I will continue to say that our bench is the stem of all our problems. Frank knew we had no chance of winning that game putting the bench in during the 4th quarter. Thus, we were forced to play the starters essentially the entire fourth and they were dead by the end of the quarter. There is just so many collateral effects from having this bad of a bench. It's actually pretty mind blowing how bad of a bench the powers that be put together.
      Last edited by rock747; 12-10-2012, 05:26 AM.
      "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

        I still think the block is not clean, nowhere near in fact, and even if it was anywhere near clean or judged to be so, the correct call would have been jump ball. but I guess in all it is easier to pile on Roy, like everyone does.

        What no one does is talk about the atrocious defence at times from West and the lack of any form of decent defence of HIll, I wont mention Hill calling his own shot way more than justified, considering he shoots a pathetic percentage for quite a while now.
        I can't believe we are end of 3rd and Hill has already heaved 7 of them up, between him and Paul they had a nice 10 - 29 let's point that out.
        Paul George played Hide and Seek, and lost, or hid himself to well.

        You mentioned Hans, it is beyond me why that guy still gets minutes, if what is left on the bench is even worse than i suggest we cut them all, swallow the salary and play a 3 man rotation up front. it can not be worse than it is.

        Roy is and remains even after this game, one of the most elite big man defenders in the NBA, he is very unlucky on his tips, which cost him "stat" points, but until he got slapped and his hook went way right he was shooting .500 or above.
        will his scoring come back? sure it will improve drastically but let's face it, he will have to get some calls going his way and some luck with his tips on the off-boards.
        and yes he gets fouled a lot and rarely goes to the line, because it doesn't get called.
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          Here is pretty much all you need to know about this game. In the last 5:30 we scored 2 points, both from the free throw line. This is a common theme with our club and has been all season long, we just go through such long extended droughts that I don’t care how good your defense is you are not going to win games doing that.


          Oh speaking of the bench did you know that Kevin Martin by himself outscored our entire bench? It’s true he had 24 and our entire bench produced 20 points.
          Graph 1: Perhaps not quite as extreme, but definitely similar to the Nuggz game 4th qtr fade.

          Graph 2: Our main players off the bench average about 25 pts combined. We just don't have the kind of explosiveness you want out of an ideas sixth man. Yet they haven't got it done as a group either to this point. Last night was a pretty good game by our bench's standards and it still wasn't even close.

          Maybe Lance can become our sixth man once Danny gets back. I mean in terms of offering some type of spark and explosiveness.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

            Originally posted by Peck View Post

            Lance Stephenson had a really good game. I have no idea why he was not in there at the end instead of Green. We desperately needed someone who could make something out of nothing in that case and Lance is one of those types of players. Frank may have been afraid that he is also one of those types of players who will make a massive mistake as well but in this case I think the tradeoff would have justified it. Either way I was proud of Lance for recognizing that Martin is a horrid defender and attacked him whenever he could. Also as I said above there were a few times that Lance got Durant on a switch and honestly I can’t think of one time Durant burnt him. Good overall game from Lance.
            I understand Vogel watching Green hit three shots in a row and deciding to ride with Green down the stretch. Don't agree with it, but I understand it. But, as you pointed out, we had no one to make something happen on offense when the Thunder clamped down. Lance has skills in those situations.

            It's frustrating to be a fan. We're not always right but often we are. Last year, it was dozens of agonizing games where we pointed out Collison was liability compared to Hill before Frank figured it out. The digest was right about that one. In years past it's been about Murphy, or Posey, or others. This year it's going to take Frank over half the season before he finally realizes Lance is a gamer, has what it takes at the end of games, and needs to be in there. By the time he figures it out, Granger will be back and we'll probably have to go through it all over again.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

              I thought the Pacers, especially the starters played a very good game. Just wasn't enough against a team that is simply better than the Pacers.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                Trying to recall...Roy not only got rejected at the rim by by Westbrook. He also was sent toppling over like a fallen giraffe by Sefalosha on a post up, right?
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                  Originally posted by able View Post
                  I still think the block is not clean, nowhere near in fact, and even if it was anywhere near clean or judged to be so, the correct call would have been jump ball.
                  The block looked perfectly clean to me. I don't see Westbrook even touching a piece of Roy. And it couldn't be a jump ball since the ball came loose from the force of the block.

                  Call it piling on if you like, but the fact is our 7'2" All-Star center had his two handed dunk attempt emphatically rejected by a point guard. Sure Russ is an athletic freak and Roy has about as much physical coordination as a baby giraffe but this is still pretty unacceptable.

                  I don't know what the audio is like on the video but if someone wanted to dub over the Mortal Kombat guy saying "Finish Him", it would seem appropriate.
                  "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                  -Lance Stephenson

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                    Ben Hansbrough > DJ Augustin. Time to pull the plug on that experiment.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                      The block looked perfectly clean to me. I don't see Westbrook even touching a piece of Roy. And it couldn't be a jump ball since the ball came loose from the force of the block.

                      Call it piling on if you like, but the fact is our 7'2" All-Star center had his two handed dunk attempt emphatically rejected by a point guard. Sure Russ is an athletic freak and Roy has about as much physical coordination as a baby giraffe but this is still pretty unacceptable.

                      I don't know what the audio is like on the video but if someone wanted to dub over the Mortal Kombat guy saying "Finish Him", it would seem appropriate.
                      It's impossible to tell from the angles we have, but I personally thought it was a foul too. Westbrook came down as Hibbert's hands were basically level with the ball and then the ball drops out at the end. If you watch you can see Hibbert's right arm drops down a lot farther than his left. If he had come down cleanly on top of the ball it would have either immediately knocked the ball out or been a jump ball, depending on how exactly Hibbert was holding on to the ball. It was close though, and refs would have to have a clear view of it happening to call it a foul. Which they couldn't get on that play since it was so close to the rim and Westbrook was blocking the only side avenue.
                      Time for a new sig.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        I understand Vogel watching Green hit three shots in a row and deciding to ride with Green down the stretch. Don't agree with it, but I understand it. But, as you pointed out, we had no one to make something happen on offense when the Thunder clamped down. Lance has skills in those situations.

                        It's frustrating to be a fan. We're not always right but often we are. Last year, it was dozens of agonizing games where we pointed out Collison was liability compared to Hill before Frank figured it out. The digest was right about that one. In years past it's been about Murphy, or Posey, or others. This year it's going to take Frank over half the season before he finally realizes Lance is a gamer, has what it takes at the end of games, and needs to be in there. By the time he figures it out, Granger will be back and we'll probably have to go through it all over again.
                        It isn't that coaches don't realize it, well maybe with JOB it was, it is just that coaches are so cautious about making a change it is frustrating.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          It isn't that coaches don't realize it, well maybe with JOB it was, it is just that coaches are so cautious about making a change it is frustrating.
                          However, following that line of thinking, Frank would be more cautious to replace Lance, who played very well for three quarters. It's one thing if he puts up a stink bomb.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                            I saw the same story we were just facing an elite team. Our bench still sucks and I don't see any rotation that fixes that. If Roy would get back to last years form that would change a lot of things for this team but that doesn't look likely. It's hard for Vogel to react to a poor play from a starter when he has almost nothing to turn to. The extra minutes given to Ian would have still served the team better if given to Roy because Ian did less with them.
                            This team with Granger and last years team probably loses this game as well but that's not to say we should be happy with the changes that were made.
                            Do the right thing and walk away Walsh.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Thunderstruck

                              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                              Maybe Lance can become our sixth man once Danny gets back. I mean in terms of offering some type of spark and explosiveness.
                              Maybe, but can the Pacers wait 25 games or so for Granger to come back? A sick anything needs help, and this applies to the Pacers as well.

                              I know this is blasphemy, but I'm not sure the Pacers can wait around until Granger gets back and still make the playoffs. That would just be disastrous considering the team Walsh inherited from Bird, which is just the opposite of what Bird inherited from Walsh. Walsh is making Bird look like an Allstar Executive of the Decade. I truly wonder what Bird would have done to make the Pacers better this past off season. Whatever it would have been I have to believe it would have been better than what Walsh has done, and this comes from one of Bird the FO guy's biggest opponents.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X