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

Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

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

  • #61
    Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Originally posted by Dece View Post
    Above average league wide, or above average for a starting 2 guard I guess is the question there. He's probably average for a starting 3, he's below average if he gets shifted back to 2 by Granger. We'll have to see how that develops. 3.5 assists for 2.5 turnovers is certainly not the numbers you'd look for to define a good passer, and I've watched pretty much all of our games, our team ball movement is bad and PG is a part of that.
    I'm not sure how you can argue Paul's only an average passer at SF when he's 5th in assist. He's easily a potential top 10 passer from the SF position, and he's probably still above average for a SG. He had 21 turnovers the first 5 games with Green and Young starting since then he's averaged around 2 per which isn't bad when you're dishing out 4 assists.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

      Originally posted by Dece View Post
      Regardless of it being a medical condition limiting his conditioning or laziness, which I never suggested, the fact is his conditioning limits his minutes. Also, I watched both of those games. In both games he was sucking air and his effectiveness was reduced due to him not being able to maintain good production at those minute levels. I mean, you're citing a game we lost where he played 40 minutes but only managed 8 rebounds, and a game against a bad team we barely won, he played 43 minutes, and only had 12-10. By the way ALL of those Miami games Gasol would have played 36-40, Hibbert game 5: 28 minutes, Hibbert game 4: 32 minutes, Hibbert game 3: 33 minutes, Hibbert game 2: 33 minutes, Hibbert game 1: 29 minutes. SO he played 1 game more than 36 minutes in the entire playoff series, and failed to get double digit rebounds. Yea. That's not helping your argument.
      Good point about those games.

      So, do you suggest that Hibs is not under medication to limit his asthma during important games? It can be limited for some time-spans. Do you think it's our team telling him not to use them or is he reluctant to do it?

      PS: My main argument actually is the validity of the per 36 stats. Even with Hibbert's asthma limiting him to 29 - 32 minutes, I think that his 24.7 career MPG is heavily skewed by the 14.4 MPG he played in his rookie year and thus that makes a per game head to head comparison not viable.
      Last edited by Nuntius; 12-14-2012, 01:04 PM.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

        I have real trouble directly comparing records that way. The West is so much more difficult than the East. A team playing roughly .500 ball in the West would probably be a 4-5 seed in the East. I would have to look at how their schedule broke down that season. If they were struggling against sub par teams then I concede the point, but I don't believe that's the case.

        I don't know anything about the effectiveness of Hibbert's medicine, when he does or doesn't use it, or the severity of the condition, I can only comment on what my eyes tell me when watching the game, and what the stats say afterword: Hibbert is not effective for more than ~30 minutes a game. Also I think his rookie season he had not yet been diagnosed/medicated for his condition, so that may also play into why he played so few minutes that year.

        re: 10 times the ball handler etc... it's a non quantitative metric, Is PG's ball handing a 2 and Harden's a 20? No, neither have a number associated with them in that manner, that's not how something like that is measured. However, the point is one guy is capable of being the primary handler in a good offense, and one guy can't even be the primary handler in a pretty bad offense. It is very clear which one is better, and that it's not real close.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

          I tell you what Nuntius, if Hibbert finishes the season with a FG% of 45% or more, I will buy you a Hibbert jersey and ship it to you. I won't even be remotely upset to do it, because as down on him as I am, it's not that I want him to fail, it's just that I don't believe he's capable of the kind of success needed to warrant his contract.

          That begs the question of what success would it take for him to warrant his contract? ~50% from the floor, 14 ppg and his current defensive contribution.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

            Originally posted by Dece View Post
            I tell you what Nuntius, if Hibbert finishes the season with a FG% of 45% or more, I will buy you a Hibbert jersey and ship it to you. I won't even be remotely upset to do it, because as down on him as I am, it's not that I want him to fail, it's just that I don't believe he's capable of the kind of success needed to warrant his contract.

            That begs the question of what success would it take for him to warrant his contract? ~50% from the floor, 14 ppg and his current defensive contribution.
            I think you're wrong too, and I live in Indy so shipping will be much cheaper

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

              Originally posted by Dece View Post
              I have real trouble directly comparing records that way. The West is so much more difficult than the East. A team playing roughly .500 ball in the West would probably be a 4-5 seed in the East. I would have to look at how their schedule broke down that season. If they were struggling against sub par teams then I concede the point, but I don't believe that's the case.

              I don't know anything about the effectiveness of Hibbert's medicine, when he does or doesn't use it, or the severity of the condition, I can only comment on what my eyes tell me when watching the game, and what the stats say afterword: Hibbert is not effective for more than ~30 minutes a game. Also I think his rookie season he had not yet been diagnosed/medicated for his condition, so that may also play into why he played so few minutes that year.

              re: 10 times the ball handler etc... it's a non quantitative metric, Is PG's ball handing a 2 and Harden's a 20? No, neither have a number associated with them in that manner, that's not how something like that is measured. However, the point is one guy is capable of being the primary handler in a good offense, and one guy can't even be the primary handler in a pretty bad offense. It is very clear which one is better, and that it's not real close.
              Hibbert played so few minutes his rookie season because he was a fouling machine...
              Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                Originally posted by Dece View Post
                I have real trouble directly comparing records that way. The West is so much more difficult than the East. A team playing roughly .500 ball in the West would probably be a 4-5 seed in the East. I would have to look at how their schedule broke down that season. If they were struggling against sub par teams then I concede the point, but I don't believe that's the case.
                I posted the schedule in my earlier post. Let's break it down:

                Game 1: 104 - 119 L to the Hawks

                Game 2: 91 - 90 W over the Mavs

                Game 3: 109 - 89 W over the T'Wolves

                Game 4: 105 - 124 L to the Lakers

                Game 5: 109 - 115 L to the Warriors (Warriors were 3 - 1 prior to this game but finished the season with 36 - 46)

                Game 6: 118 - 123 L to the Suns in 2OT (Suns were 2 - 3, finished with 40 - 42)

                Game 7: 100 - 91 W over the Kings

                Game 8: 109 - 99 W over the Suns

                Game 9: 91 - 106 L to the Mavs

                Game 10: 110 - 116 L to the Celtics in OT

                Game 11: 72 - 89 L to the Magic

                Game 12: 99 - 100 L to the Blazers

                Game 13: 86 - 89 L to the Wizards (the Wizards were 4 - 7 at the time, finished with 23 - 59)

                Game 14: 97 - 95 W over the Heat

                Game 15: 105 - 84 W over the Pistons

                Game 16: 116 - 111 W over the Warriors

                Game 17: 86 - 92 L to the Cavaliers (the post-LeBron Cavs were 7 - 9 at the time and ended with 19 - 63)

                Game 18: 98 - 96 W over the Lakers

                Game 19: 109 - 112 L to the Hawks

                Game 20: 111 - 127 L to the Rockets (the Rockets were 7 - 12 at the time but ended up 43 - 39)

                Game 21: 107 - 108 L to the Nuggets (prior to the Melo trade)

                Game 22: 85 - 94 L to the Jazz (prior to the Deron trade)

                10 of those games were home games. 12 of those games were away games. The Grizzlies also had to play in 8 back-to-backs in that stretch.

                So, it wasn't a particularly easy schedule. But still they lost to the Warriors, the Wizards and the LeBron-less Cavs.

                Originally posted by Dece View Post
                Also I think his rookie season he had not yet been diagnosed/medicated for his condition, so that may also play into why he played so few minutes that year.
                The asthma was diagnosed in 2010 so it's safe to say that this had nothing to do with why Hibbert didn't play a lot in his rookie season. My bet is that it was the coach.

                Originally posted by Dece View Post
                re: 10 times the ball handler etc... it's a non quantitative metric, Is PG's ball handing a 2 and Harden's a 20? No, neither have a number associated with them in that manner, that's not how something like that is measured. However, the point is one guy is capable of being the primary handler in a good offense, and one guy can't even be the primary handler in a pretty bad offense. It is very clear which one is better, and that it's not real close.
                I know that it's a non quantitative metric (nice way to put it, though).

                And I certainly agree that Harden has much better handles than PG. But I'm just not seeing the so much superior playmaking and passing ability. It doesn't translate to his stats. Maybe it's just the eye test?
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                  Originally posted by Dece View Post
                  I tell you what Nuntius, if Hibbert finishes the season with a FG% of 45% or more, I will buy you a Hibbert jersey and ship it to you. I won't even be remotely upset to do it, because as down on him as I am, it's not that I want him to fail, it's just that I don't believe he's capable of the kind of success needed to warrant his contract.
                  Fair enough, I guess. I never said that Hibbert is not underperforming at the moment.

                  It's just that he underperforms in a very certain area. He underperforms in shooting. His defense is better than last year. His rebounding is on par. His steals and assists numbers are comparable. His turnovers are exactly the same. There's only one area that has fallen off the face of the earth. And that's his shooting.

                  Personally, I think that it's almost entirely psychological. Want to know what makes me think that it is psychological even more than Hibbert's known issues? His shooting splits.

                  According to ESPN, Hibbert is actually shooting 45.1% on the road. That's right around the percentage that I expect him to shoot. However, in the home games Roy cannot buy a bucket. He is shooting 29.1% at home. Yes, you read it right. 29.1%!

                  He's also forcing it a lot more when he's at home. He's attempting 12.2 FGAs at home and only 9.4 FGAs on the road.

                  The combination of those two stats point out that Hibbert is under a self-enforced psychological barrier. He's trying to prove that he's worth the contract he got in front of his fans but he's failing to do so. And that ruins his confidence. That's the root of his offensive woes.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                    Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                    I don't understand how anyone who's seen all of the guys play could think that A.) PG is nearly as good as Harden or B.) Hibbert is anywhere close to Gasol. Just my personal opinion, but I think we'd be close to the top of the East right now (even without Danny) if we had Harden and Gasol on our squad.
                    Gasol doesn't even fantasize about playing the level of defense Roy is playing this year, and Paul is a better defender, better rebounder and a better 3P shooter than Harden. He's right on his heels for assists too given the way he's been playing lately.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                      Originally posted by Dece View Post
                      I tell you what Nuntius, if Hibbert finishes the season with a FG% of 45% or more, I will buy you a Hibbert jersey and ship it to you. I won't even be remotely upset to do it, because as down on him as I am, it's not that I want him to fail, it's just that I don't believe he's capable of the kind of success needed to warrant his contract.

                      That begs the question of what success would it take for him to warrant his contract? ~50% from the floor, 14 ppg and his current defensive contribution.
                      At 24 games in Hibbert has had 252 shots. 50 more games would be 74 which allows for some missed games. So double the FGAs for the rest of the way, ie 500 more, and he'd only have to shoot 49% to reach 45% for the season.

                      Make sure to sign up for Amazon Prime to get the free shipping because the bar you set is extremely low. Maybe he won't make it, but personally I wouldn't put money on a bet that close.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Gasol doesn't even fantasize about playing the level of defense Roy is playing this year, and Paul is a better defender, better rebounder and a better 3P shooter than Harden. He's right on his heels for assists too given the way he's been playing lately.
                        I sure hope he at least fantasizes about it. And I think Roy's tremendous offensive struggles more than negate his defensive contributions.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                          Originally posted by Dece View Post
                          Sorry, but it is pretty evident you don't actually watch the Grizzlies play. They have a dominant rebounding team and Gasol is a big part of that. There are only so many rebounds to get between Gay grabbing 6.5, Marc grabbing 7, and Zbo getting 13. He is a much better rebounder than Hibbert, shoots 10-15% better from the floor, and plays solid defense. It isn't close. There's a reason the Grizz are 14-5 playing in the much tougher West, were competitive without Zbo 2 years ago and competitive without Gay last year. Marc is a boss.

                          Harden is crushing his first chance at starter, I'm really not sure how much more you can ask of a guy averaging nearly 25/5/5.
                          Well maybe if you stopped watching the Griz you'd get around to watching the #1 rebounding team in the NBA instead, ie the Pacers. All this talk about how Paul isn't so hot, how Roy isn't so hot, yet they are destroying FG% left and right and yanking down rebounds with the best of them.

                          The Pacers defensive FG% is .017 ahead of 2nd place. .017 is the same gap from 2nd to freaking 14th, that's how dominate their lead in that stat is. Memphis is 2nd in Off Reb% while Indy is only 10th, but Indy is 2nd in Def Reb% with Memphis all the way down at 22nd. Indiana has the most rebounds of any team in the NBA right now.

                          So how is it that Gasol has to "share" rebounds with his dominate teammates but Hibbert doesn't have to share rebounds for the #1 rebounding team? Oh, right, West and Paul just stand around and watch while Roy gets a free shot at everything.


                          This is my grass is greener problem. Memphis is great, one of the best teams in the NBA, but so are the Pacers except for Roy's shooting and the bench scoring. In every other way they are elite and that means they have elite caliber talent on the roster. Someone is defending those shots, someone is getting those rebounds. West isn't famous as a great defender, apparently Paul is junk compared to Harden, Roy can't hold Gasol's jock, and Danny's hurt.

                          So I guess you must think it's all George Hill, blocking shots and pulling rebounds, maybe the greatest PG in the game today to be doing it all by himself. The Glove Part 2 on defense or something. Sheesh.

                          How the F do the Pacers put up those stats without the participation of Roy and Paul? See my point is that some Pacers fans get used to seeing their own guys and start picking at the nits, while at the same time ignoring the flaws of other players because they are enamored with their positives. Vnzla makes fun of this because we all know that no one ever has done this in the history of life. I'm nearly running out of enough sarcasm to deal with some of this stuff.

                          The fact that we can talk about Memphis and Indy in regards to rebounding and defense in the same context says a ton about the quality of Indy's players.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                            Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                            I sure hope he at least fantasizes about it. And I think Roy's tremendous offensive struggles more than negate his defensive contributions.
                            No, I don't think Gasol's defensive dreams go beyond flopping for a charge call or shouting for Zbo to come help. And Roy's offensive struggles don't "more than negate" his defense. That's just failing to appreciate just how destructive his rim defense has been. Not just 3.7 blocks p36, but a truckload of altered shots at the rim. When Even Turner is throwing up Tyler specials at the rim because Roy is coming at him, that's a massive impact. Hibbert is #1 in shot blocks this year, the very best shot blocker in the league. Not Smits "holding his own by being tall" blocks, but Dikembe #1 in the NBA blocks.

                            Oh, is Mutumbo too much for you to buy? Well DM had exactly two seasons with a higher block rate than Roy has going this season (4.4 and 4.2 p36, he had a 3rd year at Roy's current 3.7/36 rate). So he's getting into range of one of the most famous shot blockers of all time with his play this season, and that's not having more impact than 2 extra missed FGs a game? If Roy was shooting 50% he'd be the clear #1 AS center at this point.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                              Naptown, two other areas that could stand considerable improvement are steals and turnovers.

                              We are horrible at creating opponent turnovers, and we rarely get steals.

                              Wondering if this is purely an attempt to slow down offense and/or force long 2's?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                                Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                                Naptown, two other areas that could stand considerable improvement are steals and turnovers.

                                We are horrible at creating opponent turnovers, and we rarely get steals.

                                Wondering if this is purely an attempt to slow down offense and/or force long 2's?
                                I think a lot of it is just pace, but another is because we are playing good disciplined defense. Taking less chances means less steals, but it also means less easy points.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X