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 BillS View Post
    You're proving nothing at all. Some players not being successful after reaching the stage of scrimmaging neither equals "all players are unsuccessful after scrimmaging" nor does it equal "scrimmage is useless in determining the health of a player" - especially when in your first example the player in question did pretty well the season following.

    No one is saying "Danny can scrimmage, therefore he is totally healthy". At most, they are saying "Danny is scrimmaging, therefore it is a good SIGN that he is healthy". In particular, your cited articles refer to an injured player's FIRST (and perhaps one of only a few) scrimmage back from injury, where the data being used to make an opinion about Danny is from a SERIES of scrimmages and full practices.

    However, if you want to continue to insinuate that Danny is doing bleacher laps in his wheelchair and that doing well in scrimmage implies he'll be limping after 30 seconds in a "real" basketball game, I suspect no one will change your mind.
    It looks to me like you are talking about the same thing, just because Danny is able to practice and "scrimmage" doesn't mean squad until we see him playing a real NBA game, acting like he is 100% healthy because he is able to run up and down the court and climb some stairs is ridiculous.

    Seriously this argument some of you are trying to make saying that scrimmage is similar to an NBA game is just insane.

    Here is an example of what an NBA team scrimmage looks like:

    http://youtu.be/78iz4OEPPOw

    Yeah it doesn't look anything like a real game as some are suggesting.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


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

      So he is still in rehab...

      In a wide-ranging Q&A with "Dime," Pacers forward Danny Granger said that his six-month rehab process puts him back to recovery on October 5th, and that he anticipates playing in the preseason.
      Dime: There's been a lot of discussion about your role with the team after Lance Stephenson played so well in your absence. Do you think you're better in a starter's role, or can you contribute off the bench as well?
      DG: That's the last thing on my mind. My only focus right now is pretty much getting back on the court. I can worry about the rest later.
      Dime: Are you restricted at all in the stuff you can do, or are you full-on right now?
      DG: I'm still in the middle of my rehab. I'm in a six month rehab; I won't be six months out until October 5th…
      so I'm progressing to playing — I'm playing now, but I'm progressing on schedule and I'm still in the midst of my rehab.
      Dime: How do you get the reps in, or get ready for training camp if you can't go all out?
      DG: Well you go out, you're playing all out and you're going all out, it's just a matter of — you only can do what your body allows you to do at that time. That's basically what your injury prevents you from doing. We have doctors and trainers that know the loads you're able to handle so you're playing up to that load. So it's a progression: you start low and then you try and go higher and higher.
      Dime: So you're playing all out, but you're not where you want to be when you're playing?
      DG: Playing is a part of the rehab, so no, you wouldn't be 100 percent. Even someone, let's say Derrick Rose who had an ACL, he can play all out, but that doesn't mean he's playing at 100 percent.
      Dime: So you're not at risk for re-injuring it or exacerbating the injury by playing at all?
      DG: No, you're not at risk for that.
      Dime: Do you think that October 5th date is within reach, and you'll be able to play in the preseason to get back into the flow?
      DG: Yeah. I anticipate playing in the preseason. I definitely do
      .
      @EyeOnBasketball: Danny Granger is still recovering, but plans to play in preseason http://t.co/1u8JRWu477 HT: @countcenci
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        I would think a scrimmage is subject to the unexpected as well; it's a basketball game, not a dance.
        The potential for a slower pace, and less 'red mist', means that you can call your shots and think about what you're doing. You can favor a leg if you need to. OTOH, in a real situation, if you play tentative then your overall game (and value to the team) will suffer. Playing a bit tentative in a scrimmage is no big deal. Playing tentative in a real NBA game is a recipe for trouble. So in a real game is when you more easily do the unexpected stuff... the stuff instinct tells you to do. The stuff that has you landing awkwardly, tangling with a bigger or faster player, jumping to your zenith without thought to what comes next (impact, landing, etc)....

        As someone with a bad knee I can remember back when I wasn't as used to favoring it and instinct would take over as we were working. Planting that leg wasn't a good idea! Also, now that I think about it, one of the hardest things to avoid was stepping into a small hole, or unexpectedly onto uneven ground, etc.. True, that won't happen on the basketball court (unless Travis Best has pounded divots into the hardwood, but it would be no different than stepping onto someone's shoe in the course of a game.

        So it's that kind of stuff at full pace that will tell the story. Or even whether he can mentally or physically go at full pace...

        OTOH... I would hope he is at least scrimmaging by now. That's at least good, if expected, news.
        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


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

          It sounds like he is on track. Which has been said before. But there wasn't an April surgery before. Hopefully what held him back in February is no longer a issue for this season. Only this season can determine if he is ready for this season.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by beast23 View Post
            Exactly. I still don't know how our threads get so effed up. Well I do, but finger-pointing usually doesn't resolve much of anything.

            The original post regarded the Indy Cornrows article. The article ended by restating its premise "As long as Granger comes back as Danny Granger, and assuming Stephenson doesn't take some astronomical leap, Granger should be the guy on the floor."

            Anything else is really a secondary argument. I read the premise as the author's belief that a healthy, or pre-Injury Granger, is of more value to the team than last year's Stephenson. And, anything resembling that Granger remains more valuable to the Pacers than last year's Stephenson, unless other-wordily advances by Stephenson are achieved.

            I think another premise is not stated, but understood. The author is also referring to what might be expected in the coming season, not 3 or 5 years from now.

            I really don't see any intelligence at all in arguing against the author's belief, based on his premises. It seems that any such argument would be based on emotion and not logic.

            I have been arguing based on the author's premise--a healthy Danny Granger. In all fairness, I've heard more emotion from the Danny side than from my side.





            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            I'm not saying Lance is a better scorer. I'm saying it's possible he may become a better scorer. We don't know yet. Time will tell.

            What is more likely is that Lance will become a better all around player eventually. I've watched enough of Granger's volume shooting, mediocre handles, one-dimensional court vision creation, and on and off defense to know that he and Lance will have a good bit to compete over next year. We'll see if the Lance fans are right or if those who liked Gerald Green over Lance last year are right.
            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            The part in bold I would like to comment on. I actually think where Lance is most superior on offense is initiating things. He either dishes off to create for others or has been able to make some moves that allow him to score. I think Lance is better at this than Granger, but I agree that Granger is better one on one, (right now, anyway.)
            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            No.

            I think what this thread has proven is that, for many on PD, Granger over Lance is NOT an "easy choice." It still may be the right choice, but it's certainly doesn't seem to be an easy one.

            I view it as a problem of overlap. Granger is a very good player. But his skills are similar to PG and even Hill. Lance brings a whole different skill set that played a big role, imo, on why we were a better team last year than the year before.

            Let's look at it another way. If Marc Gasol and Dwight Howard were on our team, should we start both of them as well as Roy? No. We have some similar overlap in Pacer land, along with the very good problem of having several very good players. Because of position overlap, just being very good doesn't necessarily mean you should start or finish.
            Last edited by McKeyFan; 09-20-2013, 02:58 PM.
            "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

              For those (vnzla) that thought I was crazy for saying Paul George struggled in the post defensively against bigger SF's

              Anyone who watched George try to defend LeBron James in the post in the Eastern Conference finals last year will remember that James was able to muscle George to his preferred spots repeatedly, and George’s defense in the post is also a work in progress. He allowed .896 points per possession in the post last year, which ranks about average in the league, but that is a big improvement from the previous season, when he allowed 1.128 ppp—one of the worst. George still needs to learn and refine a couple of credible post moves offensively, but more important is just the addition of strength and heft.

              And this is from an article praising Paul for his potential. (Thanks Peck)

              http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...medium=twitter

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                I don't think unexpected is exactly what he meant. In a real game with the adrenaline flowing you are going to make harder cuts, that is where the concern is. Other than that everything can be easily replicated. Although I don't think the difference between an actual game and a scrimmage is all that big, and if he can do it in a scrimmage he is going to be fine in a normal game.
                Granger's knee problem isn't cutting though, because it's not a tear. It's tendonosis, which is impacted on the amount of stress the joint is absorbing.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  It should be pretty easy to objectively quantify if he's near his old self.
                  Maybe. As I've said before, I expect our starters to have lower scoring numbers this year due to the number of threats on our team. If Danny only gets 16ppg, I could see people saying "his offense continues to decline" even if he's efficient and within the flow of the offense.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    I have been arguing based on the author's premise--a healthy Danny Granger. In all fairness, I've heard more emotion from the Danny side than from my side.
                    Hmmmmmm.....

                    It's funny how two rational people can read the same stuff and come up with totally different opinions. I was thinking the exact opposite of what you were on this.


                    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 Anthem View Post
                      Maybe. As I've said before, I expect our starters to have lower scoring numbers this year due to the number of threats on our team. If Danny only gets 16ppg, I could see people saying "his offense continues to decline" even if he's efficient and within the flow of the offense.
                      As someone who has been pessimistic about this for a while, I'd be beyond thrilled if he averaged 16 ppg with a respectable FG%. 16 PPG would be huge.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Hmmmmmm.....

                        It's funny how two rational people can read the same stuff and come up with totally different opinions. I was thinking the exact opposite of what you were on this.
                        I've read a couple of good posts with decent stats and argumentation. One by Eleazar I thanked. But mostly I feel like I've read stuff like this:

                        Originally posted by mattie View Post
                        This is probably the most frustrating part - Besides the obvious talent gap between the two players, Danny's easily the best fit as well.

                        In Lance's fan's mind, Lance is this crazy ball handler that's dishing and setting up teammates. It's a fun fantasy. In reality, Lance plays off the ball, and passes up open shots because he can't shoot, or occasionally shoots up a brick when he's got enough confidence. A shooter is what the starting lineup badly needs.

                        And it's not hard to see that either if you notice every great offense in the NBA. They have their stars, and then they have their shooters playing with those stars.
                        The argument is just that . . . well that . . . Danny is OBVIOUSLY great, so much better . . . so why are we having this discussion?
                        "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 Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          For those (vnzla) that thought I was crazy for saying Paul George struggled in the post defensively against bigger SF's

                          Anyone who watched George try to defend LeBron James in the post in the Eastern Conference finals last year will remember that James was able to muscle George to his preferred spots repeatedly, and George’s defense in the post is also a work in progress. He allowed .896 points per possession in the post last year, which ranks about average in the league, but that is a big improvement from the previous season, when he allowed 1.128 ppp—one of the worst. George still needs to learn and refine a couple of credible post moves offensively, but more important is just the addition of strength and heft.

                          And this is from an article praising Paul for his potential. (Thanks Peck)

                          http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...medium=twitter
                          I thought putting Lebron on the block was a series shifting move. That should have happened a lot sooner than it did. Lebron abused Paul down there, which opened up Anderson for those slashers on the baseline and Haslem on the midrange jumpers. Lebron can move around Granger and back down Paul. It will be interesting to see how we play Lebron this year. Throwing Granger and Paul at him is better than throwing Paul and Sam Young.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            For those (vnzla) that thought I was crazy for saying Paul George struggled in the post defensively against bigger SF's

                            Anyone who watched George try to defend LeBron James in the post in the Eastern Conference finals last year will remember that James was able to muscle George to his preferred spots repeatedly, and George’s defense in the post is also a work in progress. He allowed .896 points per possession in the post last year, which ranks about average in the league, but that is a big improvement from the previous season, when he allowed 1.128 ppp—one of the worst. George still needs to learn and refine a couple of credible post moves offensively, but more important is just the addition of strength and heft.

                            And this is from an article praising Paul for his potential. (Thanks Peck)

                            http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...medium=twitter
                            He'll get better as he grows and gets more experience in the post. Fact is though, besides the three guys you mentioned, there's very few SFs that play in the post. I can't remember the exact number from Synergy, but I know Paul was posted up less than once a game last season. Post up defense isn't nearly as important as being able to stay in front of your man in todays NBA.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

                              The argument is just that . . . well that . . . Danny is OBVIOUSLY great, so much better . . . so why are we having this discussion?
                              As opposed to this gem from Pacergeek which if filled with logic and non-emotion.

                              People forget that Lance carried us in game 6 vs NY. Without his clutch performance, we never advance to ECF. Lancr was also THE ONLY Pacer ready for game 7 vs Miami. When has Granger ever carried us to closing out a playoff series?
                              or this one....

                              How about Cleveland bench Kyrie? Or Washington bench Wall. Portland can bench Lillard while we are at it too. Let's bench our best up and coming player!!!! That's what winning teams do!!!! End sarcasm


                              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 Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                For those (vnzla) that thought I was crazy for saying Paul George struggled in the post defensively against bigger SF's

                                Anyone who watched George try to defend LeBron James in the post in the Eastern Conference finals last year will remember that James was able to muscle George to his preferred spots repeatedly, and George’s defense in the post is also a work in progress. He allowed .896 points per possession in the post last year, which ranks about average in the league, but that is a big improvement from the previous season, when he allowed 1.128 ppp—one of the worst. George still needs to learn and refine a couple of credible post moves offensively, but more important is just the addition of strength and heft.

                                And this is from an article praising Paul for his potential. (Thanks Peck)

                                http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...medium=twitter
                                That's an important issue and about the only issue Paul had against LeBron. One more year of weights and that becomes a lesser issue. So, I recognize it.

                                What others should also recognize is that when Paul guards LeBron he prevents much of that Magic Johnson game LeBrong has...that tends to kill teams. When LeBron gets his team mates involved, you might as well count it as a W for the Heat. That's why Paul's the best player to guard LeBron. Still, I recognize the issue in the post. If he gets that corrected, this isn't even a close discussion. The fact is, LeBron can operate with Granger guarding him. He can dish to his team mates...he can drive past the hobbled Granger...and he can post up Danny and draw fouls. This is why Granger should be coming off the bench and lighting up the scoreboard. Sure, let him guard King James on occasion. It's better than Young guarding him. But make no mistake. This team was one of the best in the league defensively without Granger on the floor....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X