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/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

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

  • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

    Oh please Nuntius, you watched that game, at one point Gasol's face fouled Roy's elbow and foul trouble is the only thing that stopped him from beating us down -- anyone who watched that game saw it. He was scoring at will inside while Randolph was destroying our entire front line on the boards. No part of that win said Roy did anything good inside, he was no enforcer, no rim protector, and he certainly didn't do anything to suggest he was an equivalent player as you keep shouting, despite the fact that anyone with eyes disagrees.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
      Hibbert doesn't have the strength to play the type minutes Gasol does
      It's a matter of endurance. Not a matter of strength. Roy has athlete-induced asthma and that's why he cannot play for prolonged stretches most of the night.

      Disclaimer: I'm not using this as an "excuse". I'm just setting the record straight.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

        Originally posted by Dece View Post
        Oh please Nuntius, you watched that game, at one point Gasol's face fouled Roy's elbow and foul trouble is the only thing that stopped him from beating us down -- anyone who watched that game saw it. He was scoring at will inside while Randolph was destroying our entire front line on the boards. No part of that win said Roy did anything good inside, he was no enforcer, no rim protector, and he certainly didn't do anything to suggest he was an equivalent player as you keep shouting, despite the fact that anyone with eyes disagrees.
        Yes, I watched the game. Roy made two strong moves that forced Gasol to foul him in the second half. The fouls were legit and Hibbert drew them.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

          Originally posted by Dece View Post
          he was no enforcer, no rim protector
          So, 4 blocks scream "no rim protector"? Gotcha.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

            How many points did they score in the paint again? Aren't you on the contingent of guys here who say good defense isn't really about blocks and steals? They crushed us in the paint. 4 blocks certainly isn't a bad thing, but its not really amazing if they took 80 shots inside (probably hyperbole) and scored nearly all their points in the paint... lots of chances to get blocks in that kind of setting, and doesn't mean much if we don't get the ball back afterward. No, the Roy elbow to Gasol's face foul was not legit, though I'll certainly take it as a Pacer fan, if the same thing reversed everyone on this board would be livid.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

              Originally posted by Dece View Post
              How many points did they score in the paint again? Aren't you on the contingent of guys here who say good defense isn't really about blocks and steals? They crushed us in the paint. 4 blocks certainly isn't a bad thing, but its not really amazing if they took 80 shots inside (probably hyperbole) and scored nearly all their points in the paint... lots of chances to get blocks in that kind of setting, and doesn't mean much if we don't get the ball back afterward. No, the Roy elbow to Gasol's face foul was not legit, though I'll certainly take it as a Pacer fan, if the same thing reversed everyone on this board would be livid.
              Yes, I'm one of those guys that say good defense isn't about blocks and steals. I was just answering to your "no rim protector" comment.

              About the Roy elbow: I honestly didn't see it. You're talking about that shooting foul, right? All I saw was Roy establishing strong position on Marc, turning to his right and Marc having no other way to defend other than pushing. He pushed him and got called for a foul. That's all I saw. But hey, I could be blind. I'll try to re-watch it and see if he elbowed him intentionally. If I see the elbow, I'm going to call an elbow. I call what I see. I only saw a strong play and that's what I called.

              And now about the points in the paint issue. It seems that you missed my post in this post-game thread. Allow me to quote myself:

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Let's discuss the points in the paint match up.

              Take a look at ESPN's shot chart -> http://espn.go.com/nba/shotchart?gameId=400278172

              If you break it down, you'll see that they hit 6 shots in the paint in each quarter except for the 4th quarter. In the 4th, they only hit 3 shots in the paint (one of them was a Darrel Arthur 17 footer that apparently counts as points in the paint). So, in overall they hit 6 + 6 + 6 + 3 = 21 shots in our paint. That equals 42 points but I'm guessing that the FT awarded after the and-1 count as well, which makes sense.

              Outside of our paint? They hit 1 shot in the first quarter, 2 shots in the second, 3 shots in the third and 2 in the 4th. That's only 8 field goal makes outside of the paint.

              Apparently, ESPN's shot chart has missed some shots since they have credited the Grizzlies with 31 field goal makes while the shot chart only presents 28 but anyway.

              Let's take a look at the missed field goals for the Grizzlies.

              In the paint: They missed 9 shots in the paint in the first quarter. They missed 8 shots in the paint in the second quarter. They missed 2 shots in the paint in the third quarter. They missed 8 shots in the paint in the fourth quarter. In overall, they missed 8 + 8 + 2 + 9 = 27 shots in our paint.

              So, the Grizzlies shot 21 / 48 in our paint.

              Perimeter shots: They missed 4 perimeter shots in the first quarter (I'm not going to count the 44 ft heave). They missed 5 perimeter shots in the second quarter. They missed 6 perimeter shots in the third quarter (I'm not going to count the 39 ft heave either). They missed 7 perimeter shots in the fourth quarter. In overall, they missed 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 = 22 perimeter shots.

              So, the Grizzlies shot 8 / 30 from the perimeter.

              21 / 48 equals 43.7%.

              8 / 30 equals 26.6%.

              These calculations prove joew8302 right. The Grizzlies are bad in outside shooting. Or they were bad last night, at least. That's on the players, not the coach. However, I believe that the coach could draw some plays that could result in open 3 pointers. 'Cause the only open 3 that I remember from last game was a transition 3.

              Anyway, back on the points in the paint issue. The Grizzles may have scored 44 points in our paint but they needed to attempt 48 shots to do that. So, we held them at under 1 point per shot and that's something to take into consideration.

              However, that 43.7% seems a bit high for our defense. Let's see how Memphis usually shoots inside the paint. Here it is -> http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx

              Memphis is shooting 58.6% at the rim, 41.7% from 3-9 feet and 42% from 10-15 feet.

              So, that 43.7% isn't so bad as Memphis is generally above average in shooting in the paint.
              Yes, they scored 44 points in the paint. But they needed to take 48 shots to do it. And they only scored 6 points in the paint in the final quarter.

              I'll repeat it in bold to make sure that you understand my point:

              The Grizzles attempted 48 shots in our paint and only 30 shots outside of it.

              So, yeah. Congratulations to them that they managed to score 44 points in 48 shots. That's Kobe-esque efficiency.

              Memphis didn't kill us inside. It's that simple. Yes, we beat them on the perimeter but that doesn't mean that we got killed inside.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                I don't have the game on tape, I'd love to be able to throw a clip of it up... end of the day it was just 1 foul, so it's not a huge point either way, it was just one that stood out to me because I burst out laughing when it went our way.

                Still don't think it can be said in anyway that Roy is an equivalent player to Marc, but I feel like we've hashed around it as much as there is to be hashed at this point. No way to prove either side and neither of us are budging. (but I'm right and you're wrong so neener.)

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                  Originally posted by Dece View Post
                  I don't have the game on tape
                  I do. I'll watch it and get back to you.

                  Originally posted by Dece View Post
                  Still don't think it can be said in anyway that Roy is an equivalent player to Marc, but I feel like we've hashed around it as much as there is to be hashed at this point. No way to prove either side and neither of us are budging. (but I'm right and you're wrong so neener.)
                  You are free to have your opinion. I just happen to disagree with it. That's all.

                  But let me ask one final question. Would you find the opinion that Roy and Marc are similar players so ridiculous during last year's playoffs?
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    Roy had confidence issues in college, long before JOB came along. In fact, in his One-on-One with Mark Monteith (obligatory reference) interview, he talked about G'town using a two-pronged approach on him coaching-wise - the head coach would beat him up for failures while an assistant would help prop him up mentally. One of the biggest issues with how JOB treated him was that there was no Mike Brown or other assistant who took on the job of being Roy's prop.
                    That's all I was saying, honestly. I'm not "blaming" JOB for Roy's hot/cold confidence streaks. I just think that part of his career has "scared" him. And that's not even blaming JOB. Plenty of fantastic coaches have that "tear you down" style, and use it effectively. And I don't know that Roy would have been able to handle that from any of them. That doesn't mean those years don't effect him still. (It doesn't mean they do though either.) Whether those years should effect him is another issue entirely.

                    He's clearly a sensitive person who doesn't handle criticism well. (I get the feeling he's one of those people that is harder on themselves than anyone else could possibly be. So criticism just depresses him.)

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      He's clearly a sensitive person who doesn't handle criticism well. (I get the feeling he's one of those people that is harder on themselves than anyone else could possibly be. So criticism just depresses him.)
                      He certainly is harder on himself than anyone else. You can see it in his body language when something goes wrong. He gets way down on himself and digs a deeper hole.

                      And I believe that this is what makes Roy stronger than most people believe. Not every player has the inner strength and fortitude to call himself out.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        So, you're saying that 14.5 / 7.5 are worth a max contract. Right?


                        Isn't is a bit far from the 20 / 12 mark you claimed earlier?

                        What are you talking about? I NEVER said I expected Hibbert to be a 20/12 player. I said I NEVER expected him to be a 20/12 player. Then I NEVER expected him to be a 9.6/8/1.7 with almost 3 blocks either after receiving a Max contract.


                        I notice you want to throw in the block shots for Hibbert, but you have no comments about this years stats after he signed his Max contract. Nor did you mention how Gasol elevated his production after getting aA Max contract.

                        You want to bring up Hibbert's blocks, how many blocks did Gasol have last night? Just in case you don't recall it was "8"! I guess he was a REAL RIM PROTECTOR last night if blocks mean that much.

                        We just seem to disagree about whether Hibbert is overpaid, and neither of us is going to change the others opinion. In closing this discussion, I have no doubt Portland has no regrets that the Pacers matched their offer with the way Hibbert is playing after signing his Max contract. They have to be looking at JJ's production vs what his salary is with a broad smile on their faces. He may not be the defensive player Hibbert is, but then they didn't get stuck with a poor producing MAX contract player either.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                          Personally, I blame the FO more than Roy for the fact that he is a "near MAX" player. We could have given him 5 years, you know. As well as Roy played the last half of a 66 game season, I didn't expect the Pacers to match Portland's in your face offer. Just because the Ps always overpay the object of any other teams's fancy, doesn't mean we have too. Couldn't we have done a sign and trade for other pieces and draft choices with Roy? I hope he returns to all star level play, but won't hold my breath. IMO, Roy is what we are seeing right now. A very good rim protecter, good rebounding, pretty good passing, slow footed, offensively limited center. His money was not his fault and is only overpay if he's not doing the things we knew he can do. Max contracts on the promise of one GOOD season is part of the reason the NBA the sucks most of the time.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                            The funny thing is that if we didnt match Portland could have damn near the best team in basketball. They are a rim protector and a bench away(bench you can solve pretty easy with savy moves look at the Clippers cheap bench and moving Hickson to the bench would dramatically improve it.) from being a really legit contender

                            I dont know where they get that rim protector from but getting one is a must. Hibbert would make them go from the worst defense in the league to top 15 pretty easy imo they have good wing defenders.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              I do. I'll watch it and get back to you.



                              You are free to have your opinion. I just happen to disagree with it. That's all.

                              But let me ask one final question. Would you find the opinion that Roy and Marc are similar players so ridiculous during last year's playoffs?
                              You mean the playoffs where Big Baby Davis bullied Hibbert? Absolutely. Marc Gasol gets bullied by nobody, and certainly not that fat little crybaby.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                What are you talking about? I NEVER said I expected Hibbert to be a 20/12 player. I said I NEVER expected him to be a 20/12 player.
                                I know what you said. In fact, here's your exact quote:

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Hibbert is overpaid by 4 mil. I believe that relates to being overpaid by 30%. I never felt Hibbert would be a 20/12 guy, but he's not even the player he was last year.
                                They way you phrase the above sentence leads one to the conclusion that for someone in order to be paid what Hibbert is he should be a 20 / 12 guy.

                                Am I misunderstanding this?

                                Honestly, I could be wrong but that's my interpretation of what you write. If I took your words out of context, you are free to correct me

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Then I NEVER expected him to be a 9.6/8/1.7 with almost 3 blocks either after receiving a Max contract.
                                I expected him to be better offensively as well. But I didn't expected him to be that good defensively. Hibbert has been a lot worse offensively so far this season but he he has also been a lot better defensively. I don't believe that anyone here would expect that Hibbert would be so bad offensively and so good defensively.

                                I'd love it if Hibbert was as good offensively as he was last year but his defense has become vastly underestimated at this point due to his offensive woes.

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                I notice you want to throw in the block shots for Hibbert, but you have no comments about this years stats after he signed his Max contract. Nor did you mention how Gasol elevated his production after getting a Max contract.
                                Want the full comparison between the two? Here it is:

                                http://www.basketball-reference.com/...gasolma01.html

                                http://www.basketball-reference.com/...hibbero01.html

                                It is true that Marc Gasol elevated his production after getting a max contract. He signed his "Max" contract after the lock out ended.

                                In the 2010 - 2011 season, Marc averaged 11.7 PPG, 7 RPG, 2.5 APG, 0.9 SPG and 1.7 BPG.

                                In the 2011 - 2012 season, Marc averaged 14.6 PPG, 8.9 RPG, 3.1 APG, 1 SPG and 1.9 BPG.

                                In the 2012 - 2013 season, Marc is averaging 13.9 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 3.8 APG, 1.1 SPG and 1.9 BPG.

                                So, he is posting better numbers after he got the "Max" contract.

                                But do you want to know what else changed?

                                His minutes, his field goal attempts, his USG% and his FG%.

                                He averaged 31.9 MPG in the 10 - 11 season. He averaged 36.5 MPG in the 11 - 12 season and he is back at 35.2 MPG in the 12 - 13 season.

                                He attempted 8.5 FGAs in the 10 - 11 season. In the 11 - 12 season he averaged 11.4 FGAs and in the 12 - 13 season he is averaging 10.6 FGAs.

                                His USG was at 16.9% in the 10 - 11 season. In the 11 - 12 season his USG increased to 19.1% and in the 12 - 13 season he currently is at 18.1%.

                                His FG% steadily declined as a result. He shot 52.7% in the 10 - 11 season. In fact, he shot over 50% in all 3 seasons he played before signing the max contract. In the 11 - 12 season he shot 48.2%. In the 12 - 13 season he is currently shooting 48.4%.

                                Marc Gasol's best season was by far his second year. In the 09 - 10 season, he averaged 14.6 PPG on 9.4 FGA (58.1 FG%), 9.3 RPG (career high), 2.4 APG, 1 SPG and 1.6 BPG. He was 25 back then. It's important to note that this is the same age that Roy was in the 11 - 12 season.

                                It's nice to know the whole picture, isn't it?

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                You want to bring up Hibbert's blocks, how many blocks did Gasol have last night? Just in case you don't recall it was "8"! I guess he was a REAL RIM PROTECTOR last night if blocks mean that much.
                                Congratulations to Marc Gasol for his career high in blocks

                                His previous career high was 6. So, good job, Marc. Keep improving

                                Back on topic now. Hibbert's career high in blocks is 11. His previous career high was 9. In a playoff game.

                                Hibbert is still averaging 2.7 BPG in the season, though. He is currently #3 in the league.

                                Marc is averaging 1.9 BPG so far. He is #12 in the league.

                                Blocking shots in itself doesn't matter a lot. Protecting the rim is what matters the most. You protect the rim by blocking and / or altering shots. Hibbert does both. He is an elite rim protector. Marc is not bad either but we all saw how he just went out of the way when Gerald Green cut to the basket and dunked emphatically. He just let him dunk without even trying to contest it. We have seen Hibbert trying to contest everything that he can get to contest without being afraid of being posterized. Marc didn't even try to contest. In fact, he walked away from the basket in order to not being caught in the highlight.

                                Marc is a good defender, don't get me wrong. He is better than Hibbert on the PnR (well, a lot of people are better than Hibbert on the PnR as Hibby is bad in this area), he can protect the rim (just not at an elite level) and honestly he's just solid around defensively.

                                But sorry, Hibbert is just better when it comes to defensive impact. Especially when it comes to rim protection.

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                We just seem to disagree about whether Hibbert is overpaid, and neither of us is going to change the others opinion. In closing this discussion, I have no doubt Portland has no regrets that the Pacers matched their offer with the way Hibbert is playing after signing his Max contract. They have to be looking at JJ's production vs what his salary is with a broad smile on their faces. He may not be the defensive player Hibbert is, but then they didn't get stuck with a poor producing MAX contract player either.
                                Take a look at how Portland is faring. Yes, JJ's production for his salary is amazing. But they aren't a lock for the playoffs yet (7th seed, 1/2 games above the 9th seed) and they are much closer to the LT than we are (here's the list -> http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm ).

                                Do you know what Portland is missing the most this season? A rim protector. Take a look at this -> http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx

                                Portland's opponents shoot 65.1% at the rim (64.1% is the league average and for a comparison our opponents shoot only 60.8%) and is tied for 10th worst in the league (along with Detroit and Philly). That's not entirely terrible, of course.

                                But then you go to the 3-9 ft area. Portland is allowing a 46.5 FG% from that area to their opponents. The second lowest rated team (Atlanta) is allowing 41.9%. The league average is at 38.3%. And we are only allowing 30.3% (the best in the league).

                                A rim protector as good as Hibbert would help them tremendously and help hide Aldridge's defensive deficiencies. Hibbert would make their defense good. Do you want to know how Portland ranks defensively at the moment? Check this out -> http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/

                                21st in Opponent PPG, 23rd in Defensive Efficiency, 30th in Opponent Points in the Paint, 24th in Opponent Fastbreak points, 27th in Opponent FG%, 24th in Opponent eFG%, 24th in Opponent TS%, 29th in Opponent Two Point % and 29th in Opponent Non-blocked Two Point %.

                                I mean, seriously. What are we even talking about? Portland is 30th in Opponent Points in the Paint. 30th! 30th! We are 1st. We're allowing 35.7 PPG in the Paint (the Clippers are second at 37.5) while Portland allows 44.8 PPG in the Paint.

                                Don't you think that this would not be the case if Hibbert was in Portland? They suck defensively in the aspect that he's best at. Protecting the damn rim. He would be invaluable to them.

                                If Portland was good at protecting the rim then they would be a lock for playoffs. They could even be a quite high seed seeing that the West is once again quite open.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X