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 it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

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

  • #46
    Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

    Originally posted by beast23 View Post
    Calling it or not calling it to me is just plain stupid.
    I still don't get why you are so mad about this conversation, you can put the thread on ignore and move on.

    First off, I want an opponent spending time to prepare for Granger in the playoffs, especially if internally we would know he has no chance of playing.
    Prepare for what? did you see the guy trying to play? if I was another team I'll be happy if the Pacers play the guy.

    But the big kicker in all of this is that by saying it needs to be called is really like saying Vogel is stupid and can't be trusted to make an intelligent decision. Don't you guys think that Vogel is bright enough to recognize that Granger can't make a go of it after he's been on the floor for a minute or two? Or for that matter, do you really think that Granger will make himself available for substitution, whether in uniform or not, if his knee hurts like hell?
    Nobody is saying that Vogel is stupid calm down.

    Jeesh. Pick your fights better, because this one is just plain stupid and was over with the passing of the trade deadline.
    Nobody is picking anything.

    As for being better prepared if they know they might play. BS, these guys are supposed to be pros and prepared at ALL times. If they aren't, frankly they need to be on somebody else's team.

    This is not the NFL were you can cut players, and yes the options are pros but neither one of those pros are worth a damn(maybe OJ).
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

      A week would be Sunday's game, right?

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

        Vnzla - a couple of quick questions.

        1. Does Vogel make good decisions?

        2. Do you trust Vogel to make good decisions?

        If the answer to both of these questions is 'Yes', then why the hell is it so important to make a call regarding pulling the plug? It becomes a totally moot point.

        I understand your inclination to protect your baby, since you started the thread. But then again, you've started a few threads regarding Granger. And, whether you've started them or not, you've posted on a lot of them, usually either either offering posts that are slightly to greatly anti-Granger, or supporting the posts of those who have done the same.

        Like everyone else, I post either out of feelings regarding an issue, or when absolutely forced to, I sometimes fall back on something called logic. When I see others unable or unwilling to do the same, that's typically where my emotions get involved.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
          Vnzla - a couple of quick questions.

          1. Does Vogel make good decisions?
          I have no idea why you keep thinking that this is Vogel's decision.

          2. Do you trust Vogel to make good decisions?
          Again Vogel is not the GM.

          If the answer to both of these questions is 'Yes', then why the hell is it so important to make a call regarding pulling the plug? It becomes a totally moot point.
          Because the playoffs are getting close? you keep thinking that is easy to plug a guy on the run during the playoffs and as we have seen with other teams plugging a guy on the run doesn't work.

          I understand your inclination to protect your baby, since you started the thread. But then again, you've started a few threads regarding Granger. And, whether you've started them or not, you've posted on a lot of them, usually either either offering posts that are slightly to greatly anti-Granger, or supporting the posts of those who have done the same.
          I'm not protecting no baby so stop with that bs and stop with the anti-Danny bs too, if you don't want to see the writing on the wall then that is on you, by the way so far my "negativity"(common sense) has been spot on.

          Like everyone else, I post either out of feelings regarding an issue, or when absolutely forced to, I sometimes fall back on something called logic. When I see others unable or unwilling to do the same, that's typically where my emotions get involved.
          OK so lets see your "logic", you think Vogel is the one making the decisions, wrong, you think the Pacers have a backup plan in case Danny can't play, wrong, you think the Pacers have a plan to know how to incorporate Danny during the playoffs, I would like to know what that amazing plan is because the plan didn't look like a "plan" few weeks ago.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

            Perhaps the FO should invite you to their next team meeting and then share the minutes from their meetings from the last 6 months. Would that cover it for you?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

              I would love to see Granger come back and contribute at a high level. But clearly...some here need to begin to adjust their expectations of that happening. Also, there's no need to attack people who do not expect him to return this season.

              Also, talk of this implying Vogel is not making the right decisions is ludicrous. Vogel will be determining who plays (that is the coaches job) and if Granger is gimpy on April 15th, he will not be in the rotation. Get ready for that.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                Also, talk of this implying Vogel is not making the right decisions is ludicrous. Vogel will be determining who plays (that is the coaches job) and if Granger is gimpy on April 15th, he will not be in the rotation. Get ready for that.
                Bingo! Someone who finally gets it. And that is precisely my point. That Vogel WILL make that decision and would not attempt to play a gimpy player. At least not longer than the minute or so necessary to either discover or confirm that he is necessary. For that reason, "common sense", if I may use Vnzla's term, would indicate that it would not be necessary to pull the plug. Vogel's own observation of Granger's ability to play will resolve that in due course.

                Now, if you can successfully convey that to what's-his-name, I'd be most appreciative.

                Not taking anything away from you, but I do find it amusing that your post has been thanked by this individual, when you have essentially paraphrased what I previously stated.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  Bingo! Someone who finally gets it. And that is precisely my point. That Vogel WILL make that decision and would not attempt to play a gimpy player. At least not longer than the minute or so necessary to either discover or confirm that he is necessary. For that reason, "common sense", if I may use Vnzla's term, would indicate that it would not be necessary to pull the plug. Vogel's own observation of Granger's ability to play will resolve that in due course.

                  Now, if you can successfully convey that to what's-his-name, I'd be most appreciative.

                  Not taking anything away from you, but I do find it amusing that your post has been thanked by this individual, when you have essentially paraphrased what I previously stated.
                  The main difference here is whether people think Granger is going to return...and I guess at what level. Here are some of the likely scenarios. Notice that most are not ideal:

                  1) Danny returns in two weeks. He is able to play the rest of the season, gets in game shape and gives us 12-15 off the bench and a few really good outings of 20ppg. This is best case. If only I thought this would happen.

                  2) Danny returns in two weeks. He cannot play too much, but he does make it through the playoffs giving us maybe 10 a game and has a couple good outings in the 15-18ppg range. He is still not that mobile, so his defense is lacking. He is basically as valuable on the floor as Orlando Johnson who will be able to bring better D.

                  3) Danny returns in two weeks. He plays for a few games and the same thing happens. He sits until mid April and plays sparingly in the playoffs and is basically ineffective shooting for a poor average and is unable to defend. Our rotations suffer and our young players don't get game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.

                  4) Danny returns around April 5th to get in game shape by the playoffs. He doesn't really get in game shape due to the long layoff and the amount of time he can be on the floor. He shoots for a poor percentage because he has no legs. He is not able to defend because he lacks the lower body strength and quickness to guard LeBron due to the layoff. He cannot guard DWade obviously. Our rotations suffer and our young players cannot contribute much due to limited game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    3) Danny returns in two weeks. He plays for a few games and the same thing happens. He sits until mid April and plays sparingly in the playoffs and is basically ineffective shooting for a poor average and is unable to defend. Our rotations suffer and our young players don't get game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.

                    4) Danny returns around April 5th to get in game shape by the playoffs. He doesn't really get in game shape due to the long layoff and the amount of time he can be on the floor. He shoots for a poor percentage because he has no legs. He is not able to defend because he lacks the lower body strength and quickness to guard LeBron due to the layoff. He cannot guard DWade obviously. Our rotations suffer and our young players cannot contribute much due to limited game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.
                    If Danny plays "sparingly" exactly which Young Players is he preventing from getting Game Experience?

                    Essentially, you are postulating a fifth option, that Danny plays poorly and still gets 6th - 8th man minutes. Anything else - where Danny gets Gerald Green/Jeff Pendergraph minutes - isn't going to prevent any one of the Young Players from getting plenty of experience.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                      Danny, by seniority and loyalty alone, would get extra minutes (and games) to right himself as well as a longer leash for mistakes. So Granger under no circumstances would get only a couple of minutes unless he just took himself out of the game. IMHO...
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        Danny, by seniority and loyalty alone, would get extra minutes (and games) to right himself as well as a longer leash for mistakes. So Granger under no circumstances would get only a couple of minutes unless he just took himself out of the game. IMHO...
                        I agree that Danny might get a bit more leeway, initially, but as the playoffs draw closer, the length of that leash will have a direct correlation to his ability to contribute.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                          Originally posted by A-Train View Post
                          I agree that Danny might get a bit more leeway, initially, but as the playoffs draw closer, the length of that leash will have a direct correlation to his ability to contribute.
                          This is basically the way I personally see it. It's possible that Granger might be given a little latitude in whatever regular season games remain after(if) he returns. But if he's not ready to be a starter or heavy contributor well before the playoffs, I can't really seeing Vogel having that expectation of him during the playoffs.

                          And, as rotations are tightened and minutes reduced in the playoffs for subs anyway, if Granger cannot regain a starting role his minutes are likely going to be reduced anyway. Typically, in any individual game in he playoffs, the subs who quickly prove themselves to be performing well usually get the lions share of minutes in that game. So, if Granger does get in off the bench and is doing well, frankly I have no problem with him getting additional minutes. Like any other player, that doesn't mean he will get extra minutes he following game, nor does it mean he will be h closer.

                          Bottom line is that I trust Vogel's ability to make those decisions and use, or even not use, Granger accordingly.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                            Originally posted by A-Train View Post
                            I agree that Danny might get a bit more leeway, initially, but as the playoffs draw closer, the length of that leash will have a direct correlation to his ability to contribute.
                            Right... But as the playoffs draw near every minute Danny gets is at the expense of someone else's minutes and game experience as well as the team as a whole playing together with the rotations as they'll be in the playoffs. IOW, getting more comfortable with each other on the court.

                            Total non-issue if Danny is successfully playing the role he'll be playing come playoff time. Potential major issue if it's wasted time only to see Granger shutdown again with shrinking minutes, sub par contributions, and/or finally put on ice for the season while his replacement sits.
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                              How many games has Danny actually played in?

                              IIRC, if it is less than 10 at the end of the season, his payroll for this season would be picked up by insurance. This is definitely not a small matter to the Pacers front office, and I am sure it is being factored in heavily at this late date.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Granger’s comeback? Conrad Brunner

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                The main difference here is whether people think Granger is going to return...and I guess at what level. Here are some of the likely scenarios. Notice that most are not ideal:

                                1) Danny returns in two weeks. He is able to play the rest of the season, gets in game shape and gives us 12-15 off the bench and a few really good outings of 20ppg. This is best case. If only I thought this would happen.

                                2) Danny returns in two weeks. He cannot play too much, but he does make it through the playoffs giving us maybe 10 a game and has a couple good outings in the 15-18ppg range. He is still not that mobile, so his defense is lacking. He is basically as valuable on the floor as Orlando Johnson who will be able to bring better D.

                                3) Danny returns in two weeks. He plays for a few games and the same thing happens. He sits until mid April and plays sparingly in the playoffs and is basically ineffective shooting for a poor average and is unable to defend. Our rotations suffer and our young players don't get game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.

                                4) Danny returns around April 5th to get in game shape by the playoffs. He doesn't really get in game shape due to the long layoff and the amount of time he can be on the floor. He shoots for a poor percentage because he has no legs. He is not able to defend because he lacks the lower body strength and quickness to guard LeBron due to the layoff. He cannot guard DWade obviously. Our rotations suffer and our young players cannot contribute much due to limited game experience. Our decision to try him out hurts us in the playoffs.


                                These scenarios are just your opinions and I think unfortunately the hopes for some of the poster on here which is something I really can't relate to. It's almost like some can't wait to post something negative from some internet blogger who has no insight into the Pacers as if it's fact. I would hope that every Pacer fan would want Granger back to a point of contributing this year.
                                If these were the only scenarios then there is no hope for Granger and if that were really the case he'd already be shut down. The Pacers haven't said anything other then he's able to play if we need him to and they're just playing it safe. I'll still take Vogel's word over some internet blogger no matter how many times someone on here post that Granger's done.
                                The reality is that he's still penciled in to be the starter by Vogel once he's up to it, Vogel hasn't said anything to indicate he's changed his position on that. So the fans who only want Lance to be the starter and Granger to fall behind Johnson in the rotation need to face the fact that this is still very possible. It might not happen but we'll know soon enough. If he can't stay in the lineup then it's a done deal but he's only played 5 games. I'd like to at least give him 10 more games before deciding OJ is a better option even if those are the last 10 games of the year.

                                5. Granger returns in 2 games, still has some soreness but starts to play through it. He picks up his minutes in about 5-8 games to 20-25 then is inserted in the starting lineup giving us time to adjust the rotation with Lance in the second unit. By playoff time he gives us a scoring lift and a better defensive combination at the 2/3 with Granger and PG. If the Pacers didn't think this were still possible I think he'd be shut down by now.
                                Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X