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

Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

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

  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

    Originally posted by Peck View Post

    Also if you want to use shooting % as a guideline to being able to shoot then Dale Davis had a career .530 FG% so he must have been the best shooter our team has ever seen.
    I'd pick Dale over Danny for a starting line up.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      I'd pick Dale over Danny for a starting line up.


      I see what your trying to do there.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Yeah but he is not crazy enough to pick ten 6 feet tall players, the only reason Rondo was out was because he can't shoot and team USA had Billups, Westbrok, Rose and Curry.

        Here is a list of Danny's competition on team USA: Odom, Durant, Gay, Iguadola and Love, so yeah other than Durant his competition was not that great and he still couldn't get playing time.
        I think that sounds like a healthy dose of competition personally.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Another possibility to consider, and I don't think either is super far-fetched, either: Neither one may work out for us. Danny may never be himself again, and even if he is we likely won't be able to afford him this offseason. Lance will be affordable, but he may not get any more consistent, and I'm still not 100% convinced he doesn't have another knucklehead moment to spring on us at some point. The consistency issue is more likely to be his downfall if he doesn't work out, but both are worth keeping in mind considering his history.

          I think Hill is what he is, I think Paul is likely going to be as good as he is now or better, I think West is what he is, I think Roy's just about done growing and I think he's reached a point where he should be reliable, too, but I'm not sure about Danny or Lance if you get right down to it. Hopefully Danny's healthy, Lance is more consistent (and incident free), and one way or another they make our team a powerhouse this season.
          These are some interesting thoughts.

          I agree that Hill is pretty predictable at this point, and that's just fine. He will make winning plays for us all season. I love having him on the team.

          West will be another year removed from injury, but also another year older. It would be absolutely fantastic if he could give us another season like last year.

          Hibbert is probably close to being done growing, but his offensive explosions against New York and Miami make one wonder if he has it in him to play like that offensively over the course of an entire season. Dude averaged 17 PPG in the playoffs. Expecting 17 PPG over an entire season might be a bit much, but I think he definitely has it in him to average 14-15. But we can be pretty sure that the most important part of his game, his defense, isn't going anywhere.

          As to PG...the sky is the limit for him. It's really impossible to predict what someone that talented and young can do. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he explodes into a legit mainstream star next year. By "mainstream", I mean a guy who is consistently talked about on Sports Center and the national media outlets. I think he has it in him.

          We know that the reliable four man core of Hibbert/West/PG/Hill will be fantastic all season if healthy. And we know that Scola will be a stud off of the bench. So yeah, Granger and Lance really are the wildcards. Granger with his health and Lance with development. I'm really not too worried about Lance having a knucklehead moment. Sure it could happen, but it didn't happen last year when Bird was out of the picture, so I have a hard time believing it will happen now that Legend the mentor is back in the fold. Lance takes great pride in playing for Larry Bird and knows that he is his protege'. He doesn't want to ever let Bird down. It's not everyday that one of the five greatest players in league history takes a chance on you when not even your hometown team is interested. I think Lance understands the tremendous opportunity that he's been given here.

          Comment


          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

            This thread is like a paper tiger killing field. I'm going to make some statements: Agree or Disagree?

            Healthy Granger is a better player than Lance is at this point.

            Lance has the potential to be better than Granger (and maybe everyone on the team).

            He is not there yet and may never be anything more than what we saw last year.

            Danny and Paul can, in fact, play effectively at the same time as has been proven as recently as the 11-12 season.

            Vogel is not going to start Granger if he is still lame, and even the deepest, most loyal Granger 'fanboy' is going to be okay with that.

            Comment


            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

              MnvrChvy questions:

              Healthy Granger is a better player than Lance is at this point.

              There's just no way to know until we see them play. That's the cop out answer, but it's that simple, IMO. A 100% healthy Granger that is identical to his 2011 form is likely a better player than Lance at this point, but what if "healthy" just means that he's an as-healthy-as-he-can-possibly-be-30 year old-who-has-battled-a-rough-injury-and-will-never-quite-be-the-same-again? In the latter case, it's certainly possible that Lance could be better if Lance has big growth this season after working on his game all summer

              Lance has the potential to be better than Granger (and maybe everyone on the team).

              I think he has sky high potential and could be better than Granger, but I don't ever see him being better than PG. If Lance is better than PG someday, then this team will be polishing multiple rings.

              He is not there yet and may never be anything more than what we saw last year.

              Certainly possible, but it's rare for players to peak in their very first season of playing time. Practically speaking, Lance was just a rookie last year since he sat on the bench the first two years. This summer, he has had the opportunity to improve his game based off of his experience playing. That's something he's never been able to do.

              Danny and Paul can, in fact, play effectively at the same time as has been proven as recently as the 11-12 season.

              Hopefully, but I do think that the 11-12 season is pretty irrelevant here. Paul was just a young second year player back then and DG was clearly way above him in the pecking order. But things have drastically changed. Now, Paul is the budding superstar and DG is the guy coming back from injury.

              Vogel is not going to start Granger if he is still lame, and even the deepest, most loyal Granger 'fanboy' is going to be okay with that.

              I think most people would understand if they could see with their own eyes that he wasn't the same
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 09-21-2013, 04:31 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                MnvrChvy questions:

                Healthy Granger is a better player than Lance is at this point.

                There's just no way to know until we see them play. That's the cop out answer, but it's that simple, IMO. A 100% healthy Granger that is identical to his 2011 form is likely a better player than Lance at this point, but what if "healthy" just means that he's an as-healthy-as-he-can-possibly-be-30 year old-who-has-battled-a-rough-injury-and-will-never-quite-be-the-same-again? In the latter case, it's certainly possible that Lance could be better if Lance has big growth this season after working on his game all summer

                Lance has the potential to be better than Granger (and maybe everyone on the team).

                I think he has sky high potential and could be better than Granger, but I don't ever see him being better than PG. If Lance is better than PG someday, then this team will be polishing multiple rings.

                He is not there yet and may never be anything more than what we saw last year.

                Certainly possible, but it's rare for players to peak in their very first season of playing time. Practically speaking, Lance was just a rookie last year since he sat on the bench the first two years. This summer, he has had the opportunity to improve his game based off of his experience playing. That's something he's never been able to do.

                Danny and Paul can, in fact, play effectively at the same time as has been proven as recently as the 11-12 season.

                Hopefully, but I do think that the 11-12 season is pretty irrelevant here. Paul was just a young second year player back then and DG was clearly way above him in the pecking order. But things have drastically changed. Now, Paul is the budding superstar and DG is the guy coming back from injury.

                Vogel is not going to start Granger if he is still lame, and even the deepest, most loyal Granger 'fanboy' is going to be okay with that.

                I think most people would understand if they could see with their own eyes that he wasn't the same

                ::

                I'm not talking about speculation. Granger has achieved a level in his career far higher than what Lance has. That's a fact. If Lance has made the leap to being better than Granger, then he is not going to prove it in practices. He will have to prove it in real games. So... if Danny comes back at 100%, you have to assume that he will start. Now Lance may prove to be the better option, but that won't happen until NBA games start.

                Nobody here knows whether or not Danny will return to form. Nobody. If you are getting all uppity and passionate because you think one way or the other, you are wasting your breath.

                And obviously Vogel may see specific situations and matchups where having Lance in the SL would be the best option.

                Comment


                • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

                  Certainly possible, but it's rare for players to peak in their very first season of playing time. Practically speaking, Lance was just a rookie last year since he sat on the bench the first two years. This summer, he has had the opportunity to improve his game based off of his experience playing. That's something he's never been able to do.
                  Special, franchise type of talent aside; Contending teams rarely have young players that play key roles within their starting lineup/rotation; but when they do it's normally within a specific yet limited role similar to what Lance had last year. These players normally don't improve to star like status due to the roles they play with their teams.

                  Courtney Lee, Mario Chalmers, Taj Gibson, Trevor Ariza, and previously Tayshaun Prince are a few examples of these types of players that contributed to contending teams as younger players but never improved to being much more than capable starters on contending teams.

                  This isn't to say Lance won't improve because he most certainly should. But that improvement may simply to be more consistent and less erratic/wild as opposed to a ride to stardom.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    Certainly possible, but it's rare for players to peak in their very first season of playing time. Practically speaking, Lance was just a rookie last year since he sat on the bench the first two years. This summer, he has had the opportunity to improve his game based off of his experience playing. That's something he's never been able to do.
                    Practically speaking Lance was a third year player last year. H didn't spend the prior two seasons playing in college or overseas. He spent the prior two season on an NBA team, practicing and playing with NBA players, coached by NBA coaches, living the NBA life. In his second season he was giving a good amount of playing time until it was obvious he wasn't ready to play yet. He was in no way a rookie. So stop spitting out such delusions, and start facing reality. In all honesty Lance's potential is more in the range of 6th man of the year, than all-star.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                      [QUOTE=MnvrChvy;1709789]This thread is like a paper tiger killing field. I'm going to make some statements: Agree or Disagree?

                      Healthy Granger is a better player than Lance is at this point.
                      Better one on one? Yes. Better all around? Up for debate.


                      Lance has the potential to be better than Granger (and maybe everyone on the team).
                      I'm not sure he can be a better all around player than PG, but it could be close. He could certainly become a better offensive player than PG.


                      He is not there yet and may never be anything more than what we saw last year.
                      Doubtful.


                      Danny and Paul can, in fact, play effectively at the same time as has been proven as recently as the 11-12 season.
                      Certainly. The real question is can PG and Lance play together slightly more effectively.


                      Vogel is not going to start Granger if he is still lame, and even the deepest, most loyal Granger 'fanboy' is going to be okay with that.
                      Of course. And, to be clear, as a Lance "fanboy," I don't want Granger to be lame. No one does.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                        What exactly is Danny Granger better at? Shooting the basketball? Most definitely.

                        But do these skills matter: Rebounding? Defense? Dribbling? Passing?

                        Don't feel bad though. Even Coach K overrated him at first.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          What exactly is Danny Granger better at? Shooting the basketball? Most definitely.

                          But do these skills matter: Rebounding? Defense? Dribbling? Passing?

                          Don't feel bad though. Even Coach K overrated him at first.
                          While his best offensive skill is definitely shooting, he's not a one trick pony. Unless you're saying that if kyle korver was on our team in place of granger, korver would have scored 30+ ppg? Because korver is a better shooter. Granger has a dynamic array of offensive tools. He can shoot from 3, shoot from midrange, post up. Off the dribble he has crafty hesitation moves to get into the lane, a decent pull up jumper, and once he's near the hoop he finishes creatively.

                          Will he wow you with his ball handling or court vision? No. Fortunately he will always have a mixture of George hill, west/scola, and Paul George who have played and will continue to play the role of point guard by committee..

                          Our offense plays with guards, wings, and bigs more so than traditional positions. Stephenson is a guard and granger is a wing. So obviously they will have different skill sets.

                          Do you think it is possible you have fallen victim to the "what have you done for me lately?" syndrome? Do you remember why Granger sat and Iguodala played? It was because Granger wasn't as good a defender as Iguodala who is now widely considered one of the top 3 perimeter defenders in the league.

                          Overrated? Was the press of the league overrating Granger when they voted him most improved player? Did the coaches as a whole overrate Granger when they selected him as an all star reserve? Was Frank Vogel overrating Granger when he designed his smash mouth offense because it fit his personnel, including their best player and top scorer Danny Granger? Was Larry Bird overrating Granger when he repeatedly refused to trade him despite rumors flying around constantly? Was Donnie Walsh overrating Granger when given the opportunity to trade him he did not (this last one is iffy, he would have had a very short window to trade him for good value now that I'm thinking of the timeline now)?
                          Last edited by aamcguy; 09-21-2013, 09:15 PM.
                          Time for a new sig.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            What exactly is Danny Granger better at? Shooting the basketball? Most definitely.

                            But do these skills matter: Rebounding? Defense? Dribbling? Passing?

                            Don't feel bad though. Even Coach K overrated him at first.
                            Shooting, scoring, getting to the line, converting when at the line, and (outside of a 19 game stretch in the playoffs) rebounding. Their defense is bout the same with each being stronger in certain areas.

                            As for your sarcasm, you can claim coach K overrated him, but will coach K ever even think about Lance? Hmm

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              Shooting, scoring, getting to the line, converting when at the line, and (outside of a 19 game stretch in the playoffs) rebounding. Their defense is bout the same with each being stronger in certain areas.

                              As for your sarcasm, you can claim coach K overrated him, but will coach K ever even think about Lance? Hmm
                              Why wouldn't Coach K consider Lance? Stephenson IS a future all star
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                                Why wouldn't Coach K consider Lance? Stephenson IS a future all star
                                Can you tell the future in a general sense or does it strictly relate to basketball? If the former, I would like a few lottery numbers please. I'll even share the winnings with the rest of PD.
                                Time for a new sig.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X