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

Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

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

  • Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

    I think we can start discussing this question. My short answer is I think it is or at least it might be.

    IMO here are the best pacers defensive teams - in no order

    1994 - Brown's first season. You had a healthy McKey, AD, DD, Workman. All great defenders.
    Byron Scott was also very underrated.

    1995 - You did lose some when you replaced Workman with Mark Jackson. But Dale and Antonio were more experienced and confident, and McKey was just as good as the year before.

    2004 - Best defensive player in the NBA - Artest. A great defensive tandem in Foster and JO. I think this is the best defensive frontline we have ever had. Sure 1995 was good too, but Smits really brought it down a few notches. But when the Davis boys and Mckey were in the game together that was better than 2004.

    2012 - Stats wise this is the best of the 4. once Granger comes back and you have Paul George, George Hill and Danny, I will argue that is by far the best perimeter group of defenders we have ever had as a group. West is very solid and experienced. Hibbert's only weakness is on pick and rolls and when he has to come away from the lane area. Roy is our best combination of shotblocker and basket protector we have had.

    Coaching - Brown, Carlisle, Vogel. You would have to go with Larry Brown above the other two. Also a factor is the rules were so different back in 1995 that it was easlier to play defense back then.

    The Bird years the pacers were solid defensively as a team, but not nearly as good as the 4 teams discussed here. You added Rose and Mullen, Smits and Mckey both were not nearly as good. if it weren't for Dale Davis, the late 90's teams would have been poor defensively
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-20-2012, 11:48 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

    Even though I'd prefer to forget about them in hindsight, that 04 team was pretty dominant defensively. Defense was the main reason we won 61 regular season games. Though I will forever dislike him, Artest was the true MVP of that team, IMO. It's no coincidence that our best regular season of the JO/Artest years was the season in which Artest managed to stay out of trouble for most of the year. Artest playing at a high level is what truly made that an elite team.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

      The big change this year is that West has become a really strong team defender. He does a good job denying baseline access and he also uses his size inside to take up space. He has been a pretty good help defender as well. I think a huge part of this is more time for his knee to heal. He's never been a dominant defender, but last year was maybe the worst I have ever seen him on D in his career, he wasn't moving quite the same as he is now.

      I don't know it's tough to say, we are only 26 games in, but I am really impressed with our D. Our offense has been really bad so the fact we are 2 games over .500 without maybe our best player or at least one of our best players is pretty good IMO.

      The more Paul develops and becomes a dominant force, the less Hibbert will get exposed on PnR. You are already starting to see it. Paul has stretches where he is a hurricane on defense because of his length. He had a sequence last night against Utah where he was able to go from the paint to the 3 point line and back in about 3 steps and he totally shut down Utah's inside-out action.


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

        That is a tough one. Right now, I would probably give the nod to the 2004 team. Just because of Artest and JO alone. That was one bad a@# team that should have won the championship the following year.

        What I hope is when Danny comes back we are even better at D, and when all is told and we look back on this team, I hope we will all think that this is the best defensive team ever.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

          The only "weakness" to our defense is when the opposing team has a 5 that can consistently hit 16 ft, spot up J's. They run pick and roll to death, and either the big has that open J, or the guard is able to pull up and hit the J. Most of our losses have come with opposing team's hitting mid range, fade away jump shots (Jennings the other night, Durant in OKC, Parker at BLF)

          To answer the question--I think we are easily the longest, strongest, and most athletic defensive team we've had from top to bottom. With the exception of DJ and Hans, most of the players within our rotation are quite long and strong for their position. Even Green has shown some good ability defensively with weakside blocks from time to time.

          The 2004 team was very, very good defensively. BUT I think experience, and coaching had as much to do with that than anything. Artest was at his peak, JO and Foster patrolling the paint. But aside from that, nobody was a "standout" defensively on an individual basis.

          Also the league was VERY different then. We were 3'rd (IIRC) in the league in pts allowed per game with an average in the 80's. (85.6) That would easily lead the league nowadays. As a comparison, we are currently 3rd in pts allowed at 90.5 ppg. So I think that's a feather in the cap of the current team.

          .

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

            2004 team had two major defensive issues, Tinsley and Reggie. Tinsley could get steals but he also was lazy on D a lot, and Reggie was just not the athlete to do it.

            Assuming both teams are healthy, it's tough for me to not say that Hill, George, Granger, West, Hibbert is better than Tinsley, Reggie, Artest, JO, Foster on defense. The big difference between those two teams right now is that the 2004 team was pretty good offensively and it rarely gets discussed in that way.

            I think Hill is a good defender, not great, but even having a good defender at your point of attack is a huge, huge thing.
            Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-20-2012, 12:18 PM.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

              Great question and maybe too early to tell, but I agree perimeter wise it is the best. McKey was lockdown for the early/mid 90s teams, but your other perimeter defenders were Mark Jackson, Reggie, Jalen, Travis Best. That group wasn't awful, but at best each had a weakness. Early 2000s teams had Artest, but an aging Reggie and Tinsley, obvious holes there.

              George Hill is maybe the best Pacers defensive Point Guard in the modern era, thats not to say he's Gary Payton, but he basically can effectively guard a variety of sized/skilled starting Point Guards every night. He ranges from an advantage match up to able to hold his own, every night. Thats a big win with the long line of journeyman Points who've been here.

              PG is All NBA defensive team caliber so far this year, imo, what he did to Deng on both sides of the court a few games back was pretty remarkable. He's showing his ability to guard his man and be disruptive as well as erase other mistakes. His stats don't come close to showing what he does for the team concept.

              Lance holds his own as a starter (more later), Sam Young is a plus defender off the bench, never a detriment. Roy can dominate games defensively is spurts and in crunch time he's been as good as you can get. DWest isn't a crazy highlight type defender, but what he does do is set the tone physically. Only once have I seen them out muscled and it was the first Milwaukee game, which I'm guessing Skiles showed them last years physical domination/almost fight with Larry Sanders running backwards on a loop as preparation. Don't discount that fear factor DWest brings, teams don't mess with him and/or the team like they used to in the Murphleavy soft days. So, he'll never block shots, draw charges, have big steal numbers, but he will cave in someones chest setting up position routinely that makes the other team realize its not a fun little run and gun pick up game. Mahinmi gives you a legit center sized defender on those nights you play against true Center size.

              As a team, they are tied together to steal Vogel's verbiage. It takes trust to leave your guy to cover as a team, knowing a teammate has your back. They hold each other accountable too, without infighting/pouting. Watch closely, you'll see them get after each other when they give up an easy bucket. Just fun to watch. That is one of the main reasons you can't bring in a Nate Robinson or someone who's too ego-soft to sacrifice for the team and/or take criticizm from teammates when he misses an assignment.

              So I guess yes, I do see this as a throwback team in that they are starting to show spurts where teams can't score on them, I mean 2 single digit quarters, thats a pretty big deal. If they get to that under 5 mins lock down level, it won't even be a question anymore they are the best ever, imo.

              Guys who hurt you are Green, not that he can't, he isn't quick mentally, defensively. Back up Point Guard, I mean, just no one on the roster who's a plus defender at that spot. Tyler is okay, still misses rotations, never be a shot blocker, good physical prescence and general annoyance that teams hate to play against.

              When Danny comes back, he needs to be as mentally sharp as this group is now or be held accountable. He has lapses and always has and its all mental. He can't have that anymore. Hopefully watching from the bench has helped him clean this up, but he can't be the weak link. Lance doesn't get near enough credit for how solid he's been with this group, hopefully Danny can keep the train rolling.

              Side Note: I wonder if they'll pick up a defensive back up point guard at some point, it would be great if 2012/13 Haywoode Workman was around somewhere. I wonder if when Danny comes back if they move Lance to back up Point Guard, play Sam Young at back up 2, Green at back up 3. I'd hate to see any of those 3 guys not get time when the alternative is an okay to bad defensive Point guard in their place.

              Sorry for the length, just started typing, but I love good defense.
              Last edited by Speed; 12-20-2012, 12:21 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                Another big plus to the defense this year, the respect Roy is getting from refs. He is really allowed to play, especially late in game. As long as he makes a good effort to get his arms up they are giving him the benefit of the doubt more than the offensive player. Paul is also getting respect from the refs defensively. This is something that Artest and JO never really got in 2004, for obvious reasons, especially in respect to Ron.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  2004 team had two major defensive issues, Tinsley and Reggie. Tinsley could get steals but he also was lazy on D a lot, and Reggie was just not the athlete to do it.

                  Assuming both teams are healthy, it's tough for me to not say that Hill, George, Granger, West, Hibbert is better than Tinsley, Reggie, Artest, JO, Foster on defense. The big difference between those two teams right now is that the 2004 team was pretty good offensively and it rarely gets discussed in that way.

                  I think Hill is a good defender, not great, but even having a good defender at your point of attack is a huge, huge thing.
                  Hill is a step slow for the point, but his length helps him out here. He struggles with shifty guys with that in-between game (Jennings, Parker, Lillard) but holds his own against others. I thought he played pretty good defense against Lawson, Westbrook, and Irving.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Side Note: I wonder if they'll pick up a defensive back up point guard at some point, it would be great if 2012/13 Haywoode Workman was around somewhere. I wonder if when Danny comes back if they move Lance to back up Point Guard, play Sam Young at back up 2, Green at back up 3. I'd hate to see any of those 3 guys not get time when the alternative is an okay to bad defensive Point guard in their place.

                    Sorry for the length, just started typing, but I love good defense.
                    I hate the thought of Lance as the backup pg, we need someone who can actually initiate the offense as our backup pg, We have good d but we are loosing games because we can also go long stretches without scoring. I think Ben has actually done a pretty decent job as the backup pg but I would much rather see a Real pass first pg and move Hill to the 2 or make him the backup pg again.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                      The 2004 team I say was by far the best defensive team the Pacers ever assembled. The defensive rating of that team was the best in all of the Pacers NBA season. Having the DPOY in Artest and with JO and Foster guarding the paint, they just dominated the competition through defense. Best defensive front line yet.

                      The current team, if they continue with what they are doing right now, can be better than the 2004 team as the current starting 5 including Granger is the best Pacers team in terms of length and height. They may not be as physical as the 2004 team but their length really provide the advantage of bothering shots, and West is the only one who looks short in terms of his position (he's bulky though so he makes up for it).

                      As weird as it is, in the past years we are always bothered by their lack of defense. You may never imagined before that we'll be talking right now about this team as compared to the 90's team or to the 2004 team in terms of defense.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                        Tough and fun question. Looking down the line as it currently stands:

                        Hill vs. Tinsley
                        Stephenson vs. Reggie
                        George vs. Artest
                        West vs. O'Neal
                        Hibbert vs. Foster
                        Bench vs. Bench

                        That's a tough call! I think both teams have/had two players playing All Defensive Team defense. It's hard to beat Artest's defense that season but Hibbert is probably better than the '04 O'Neal ('06-'07 O'Neal might be a different story). Hill is definitely better than Tinsley, but who's better between Stephenson and end of career Reggie? Foster is definitely better than West, but West is much improved this season. Mahinmi, Young and Tyler vs. Harrington, Fred Jones and Anthony Johnson.

                        I really don't know. I'm glad that this debate can be had.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                          I think PG is ahead of Artest's defensive path thus far. Artest was 25 in '04; PG is 22. He's damn close to Artest in individual defense right now as Artest was in his peak. The one thing PG still might trail him is in off-the-ball team defense. But PG is a ridiculous defender. He's longer and more athletic than Artest.

                          Hibbert is defending the rim like a beast.

                          Hill is easily a better defender than Tinsley.

                          Foster really D'd it up, and the combination of Foster and O'Neal is probly stronger than Hibbert and West.

                          I'd say this team is at least equal to the '04 team, and I think by the end of the year, their playoff defense is going to be ridiculous.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 12-20-2012, 01:34 PM.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                            If you can hold teams to 90 points a game in this era of the NBA, you are a title contender.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                              For me the 2004 was better because they could get stops against any team and usually against virtually any player in the league when they needed. The current team isn't at that level against individual players, at least not yet.

                              George is very athletic and long and that lends very well to his great defensive play. But Artest was so strong and anticipated so well. Artest was one of the best defenders to ever play the game and could equally defend 3 positions on the floor. He could also defend all but the faster PGs and some centers as well. Where Artest separated himself from almost any other player to ever play the game was his constantly punishing, physical, in-your-face off-the-ball defense that he played.

                              And I believe that no matter how much George improves, his off-the-ball defense will never be played to the same level as Artest's. Such defense is not based in learning some set of skills. It is a mindset. Only a handful of players ever have it.

                              That is not to say that George will not learn to play some form of defense that is nearly as successful off the ball as Artest's. It would not be of great surprise to me if he did. But George's defense will never be so physically punishing that it interrupts the total game of his opponent such that it just zaps his energy to the extent that he plays fewer minutes and contributes much less to his team on both ends of he floor.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X