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

Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

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

  • #46
    Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    I'm not saying that Haddadi is that good. But he is a 7 footer that can play good defense. Since Arthur was killing them on offense, Haddadi could have been the better option for a team equally big as theirs.
    Haddadi should have signed elsewhere in the off-season. Memphis really hasn't given him enough playing time to develop him into a quality backup, but I think he has the skills and, more importantly, the desire to play 15-20 minutes a night.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

      Pacers shot 20-24 from the line...83%. Around .800 FT shooting would be a nice thing to retain.


      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

        DJs demeanor always appears uninterested and pouty to me. He never provides a spark. (doesn't appear to play hard) But yesterday I saw a bright eyed kid who was competing and motivated, though I only felt like he played adequately. I'm sorry, if you can play that way when you are starting, you can play with that same attitude coming off the bench.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          I'm currently reading the Grizzlies' game thread (http://boards.grizzliesonline.com/in...c=14768&st=100) and they make some valid points about their team.

          Lionel Hollins elected to give minutes to Darrel Arthur due to Gasol's foul trouble. Darrel had 6 points, 4 rebounds and 2 blocks but also had 4 turnovers and according to them was not good at D either.

          And they make this legit question. Why didn't they use Haddadi? Do you feel that the game would turn in their favor if they played another 7 footer?
          Originally posted by Disgruntled Grizz Fan View Post
          well we are losing to a team who's PGs are DJ Augustin and Ben Hansbrough. Amazing, amazing
          .

          https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

          Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

            Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
            Haddadi should have signed elsewhere in the off-season. Memphis really hasn't given him enough playing time to develop him into a quality backup, but I think he has the skills and, more importantly, the desire to play 15-20 minutes a night.
            I'm inclined to agree. I haven't watched Haddadi enough to make an accurate evaluation of his skills and talents but there's no reason not to develop a 7'2 265 lbs Center, especially when he can play good D. Haddadi is a quite good post defender and they could use him in several occassions.

            For instance, the Grizzlies used Haddadi in a game agains the Lakers last March. He played almost 13 mins and contributed 10 points, 6 rebounds and 3 blocks. He can contribute defensively and on the boards but Memphis has only used him 5 games this season.

            It makes sense for them since they want to develop Darrell Arthur in order to be their PF of the future but Darrell can lose them some games. He absolutely contributed to our comeback with his turnovers early in the game. But I understand that coaches need to build confidence and trust with the players that consider part of their future core. It's apparent that Haddadi is not in their long-term plans. Which is a shame, really.

            I had a similar opinion last year on Vogel's lack of usage of Fesenko. I feel that both Kyrylo and Hamed can be solid back-up bigs, if given the opportunity.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              I'm inclined to agree. I haven't watched Haddadi enough to make an accurate evaluation of his skills and talents but there's no reason not to develop a 7'2 265 lbs Center, especially when he can play good D. Haddadi is a quite good post defender and they could use him in several occassions.

              For instance, the Grizzlies used Haddadi in a game agains the Lakers last March. He played almost 13 mins and contributed 10 points, 6 rebounds and 3 blocks. He can contribute defensively and on the boards but Memphis has only used him 5 games this season.

              It makes sense for them since they want to develop Darrell Arthur in order to be their PF of the future but Darrell can lose them some games. He absolutely contributed to our comeback with his turnovers early in the game. But I understand that coaches need to build confidence and trust with the players that consider part of their future core. It's apparent that Haddadi is not in their long-term plans. Which is a shame, really.

              I had a similar opinion last year on Vogel's lack of usage of Fesenko. I feel that both Kyrylo and Hamed can be solid back-up bigs, if given the opportunity.
              Sorry I disagree. I have a lot of respect for Lionel Hollins and his coaching abilities. Look how far Memphis has came under his leadership. I have full confidence Hollins is playing the guys he feels will give him the best shot to win. Hollins watches Haddadi (and everyone else) practice on a day to day basis. If Hadaddi was good enough to warrant serious playing time Hollins would be giving it to him.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                I just finished watching the second half. It was a beauty

                Memphis is a quite similar team with ours and it's always a beauty to watch two defensive-minded teams going at each other. It was an intense game and this win was a great New Year gift.

                Paul George played great, of course. Roy Hibbert did a good job. West was outmuscled all night by Randolph and made some bad turnovers but still managed to get to 13 and 9 with 2 blocks. Lance was good, especially in the first half. He did some mistakes in the second half but I'm glad that he wasn't pulled from the game when he missed those two boards (although, the first missed rebound was West's fault and not Lance's). DJ Augustin surprised us all. He is still bad on defense (I mean, a simple screen can throw him off from the entire defensive possession) but he came up big offensively. He hit four 3s (including a pretty big one to put us ahead by 6 points late in the 4th) and iced the game with his free throws. He made some nice reads offensively as well. He had an excellent pass to West on a secondary fast break in the first half and also made a great pass to a cutting Hibbert in the third quarter. He has the ability to penetrate and dish. Tyler Hansbrough had a good game. His energy is always a given but he hit some jumpers this time around to go along with his rebounding and 2 blocks. Ben Hansbrough came up big when we needed him the most. Those two 3s in the start of the 4th put us back in the game. I'm not sure if we could come back without those 3s. Which is a scary thought, of course

                Ian Mahinmi and Gerald Green could play better. The good thing is that they contributed more than they cost us. For example, Mahinmi didn't get shots to fall and didn't draw fouls but he had 2 steals and blocked out nicely. Gerald Green shot 2/5 but he had 1 rebound, 1 assist and 1 steal to go along with his points. And he only turned it over once. So, while they could have been better, they didn't cost us anything.

                As people have noted, we would have lost the game if it wasn't for the 3 point shot. But hey, the 3 point shot is an important weapon that has to be utilized. It is only negative when you live and die by it. Now, chances are that we aren't going to get 6 3 point shots out of Ben Hansbrough and DJ Augustin but that level of production can be replaced with George Hill and Gerald Green (and, of course, Granger when he comes back).

                So, I'll accept the good shooting night and take the win

                Before I go on and analyze the points in the paint and the Gasol vs Roy match up, I need to say something about the rebounding.

                They outrebounded us 44 - 38. They had 18 offensive rebounds and we had 11 offensive rebounds. That's a significant difference and it's fair to say that we lost that battle.

                Most of their offensive rebounds came from the Power Forward spot. Randolph had 5 offensive boards and Speights had 4. Those were half their offensive boards. West was simply outmuscled by Randolph most of the time and Tyler lost some assignments in the first half as well. Lance, PG and Gerald Green lost some boards as well. Hibbert and Mahinmi did a good job blocking out their match ups when they were not guarding a player in the perimeter after a switch. Strangely, our PF spot grabbed 8 of our 11 offensive boards. So, that's something to chew on.

                Also, I have to note that if we had George Hill the rebounding battle would be closer. As I've said in a previous thread, George Hill is an excellent rebounder. His 4.4 rebounds per game put him at the 3rd place of the rebounding leaders for PGs along with Jason Kidd, Greivis Vasquez and Stephen Curry. Only Rajon Rondo and Russel Westbrooks are better rebounders in the PG spot. DJ Augustin, on the other hand, is not a good rebounder. Not that it is his fault that we lost the rebounding battle (that was mostly the fault of our PFs) but I'm just saying that with Hill it could be closer.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                  Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                  Sorry I disagree. I have a lot of respect for Lionel Hollins and his coaching abilities. Look how far Memphis has came under his leadership. I have full confidence Hollins is playing the guys he feels will give him the best shot to win. Hollins watches Haddadi (and everyone else) practice on a day to day basis. If Hadaddi was good enough to warrant serious playing time Hollins would be giving it to him.
                  It's good that you have a lot of respect for Lionel Hollins since the majority of the Grizzlies fans at that forum seemed to have lost all confidence on him. Of course, I take their comments with a grain of salt since a lot of fans tend to overreact after a loss and lash out to their players / coaches in order to vent (I wonder where have I seen it before ).

                  Personally, I respect both Lionel Hollins and Frank Vogel. But I disagree with them in the use of Hamed Haddadi and Kyrylo Fesenko, respectively. However, I can see why they did that.

                  Tyler Hansbrough was a lottery pick. A coach has the obligation to try and develop the lottery pick that the FO drafted. Therefore, Tyler will get PT and chances even if his play isn't cutting it.

                  Darrell Arthur wasn't a lottery pick but he was still a 1st round pick. He was very good for them in 2010-2011. He was injured last season and the FO was quick to extend him. They have invested in him and so he will continue to get PT. He is their PF of the future. They have to develop him.

                  Kyrylo Fesenko was just a late FA pick up for Indy. He was more of an insure than anything else. Of course, I believe that Vogel should play him when it was clear that we needed a rim protector and Lou wasn't cutting it but he chose to stick with his plan (which I respect even though I disagree).

                  Hamed Haddadi is used in a similar manner. He is used as an insurance. He could be used in several situations (as I've said, he's a good post defender) but he isn't getting PT because he isn't in the future plans of the Grizzlies.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                    @HPbasketball: I balked at the idea yesterday inititally when someone asked, but if you offered Paul George for Rudy Gay and a future 1st, I'd jump at it.



                    I wouldn't do it and I like Rudy.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      It's good that you have a lot of respect for Lionel Hollins since the majority of the Grizzlies fans at that forum seemed to have lost all confidence on him. Of course, I take their comments with a grain of salt since a lot of fans tend to overreact after a loss and lash out to their players / coaches in order to vent (I wonder where have I seen it before ).

                      Personally, I respect both Lionel Hollins and Frank Vogel. But I disagree with them in the use of Hamed Haddadi and Kyrylo Fesenko, respectively. However, I can see why they did that.

                      Tyler Hansbrough was a lottery pick. A coach has the obligation to try and develop the lottery pick that the FO drafted. Therefore, Tyler will get PT and chances even if his play isn't cutting it.

                      Darrell Arthur wasn't a lottery pick but he was still a 1st round pick. He was very good for them in 2010-2011. He was injured last season and the FO was quick to extend him. They have invested in him and so he will continue to get PT. He is their PF of the future. They have to develop him.

                      Kyrylo Fesenko was just a late FA pick up for Indy. He was more of an insure than anything else. Of course, I believe that Vogel should play him when it was clear that we needed a rim protector and Lou wasn't cutting it but he chose to stick with his plan (which I respect even though I disagree).

                      Hamed Haddadi is used in a similar manner. He is used as an insurance. He could be used in several situations (as I've said, he's a good post defender) but he isn't getting PT because he isn't in the future plans of the Grizzlies.

                      That just shows how dumb fans are, nothing more. Look at the Grizzlies record before Hollins and after. People are stupid.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        @HPbasketball: I balked at the idea yesterday inititally when someone asked, but if you offered Paul George for Rudy Gay and a future 1st, I'd jump at it.



                        I wouldn't do it and I like Rudy.
                        Paul is better on defense and will be better on offense than Rudy Gay. Paul is playing better than Granger right now...and he's only 22. Paul George is going to be the best NBA Pacer ever folks.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          Paul is playing better than Granger right now...and he's only 22..
                          Thats not hard to do right now LOL.
                          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

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

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            @HPbasketball: I balked at the idea yesterday inititally when someone asked, but if you offered Paul George for Rudy Gay and a future 1st, I'd jump at it.



                            I wouldn't do it and I like Rudy.
                            We would be fools to take on Rudy's contract.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                              Originally posted by *astrisk* View Post
                              DJs demeanor always appears uninterested and pouty to me. He never provides a spark. (doesn't appear to play hard) But yesterday I saw a bright eyed kid who was competing and motivated, though I only felt like he played adequately. I'm sorry, if you can play that way when you are starting, you can play with that same attitude coming off the bench.
                              I thought he played well yesterday, but I don't think his demeanor was too different than usual. I think its just his character - just as Hansbrough is often overly enthusiastic, I think DJ is the opposite. I actually think its a good trait to have in a PG.
                              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Pacers/Grizzlies Postgame Thread 12/31/12

                                Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                                That just shows how dumb fans are, nothing more. Look at the Grizzlies record before Hollins and after. People are stupid.
                                I agree with that but that wasn't the point of my post.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X