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 Heisenberg View Post
    It's just arguing for the sake of arguing.
    Welcome to PacersDigest. First time here?

    I can't wait for the games to start. Heck, I can't wait for the PRACTICES to start.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      I believe we were discussing logic, emotion and intelligence....



      The fact you thanked this post is amazing really.

      I made it very clear early in this thread, I will trust Frank to do what is right and live with whatever he says. I like Danny but I like Lance as well.

      But come on....both sides are fueled by emotion and partisanship, this post does nothing but prove that.

      If your argument is that the title of the article is a fallacy then I will agree with you. This isn't really an easy choice. In fact I think it is a choice that if not handled properly could mean the difference between a deep playoff running team and an early exit.
      I never said our side didn't have emotions. Both sides do. It's a message board. I just never accused the other side of being completely illogical and without any intelligence at all.
      "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

        I have "lurked" on this Forum almost all Summer, and this is the most emotional discussion I've seen so far. We all have our own ideas about who should start and how much they should play. However, that decision still rests in the hands of Frank and his asst. Coaches. We just get to sit back and enjoy the results. Danny has been the best player and most well liked player on the Pacers since Uncle Reggie left. A lot of us have really gotten behind Lance and his struggles to become a pro. I don't care which of them start. I want to see them on the floor together whenever possible. I still would like to see Danny as the 6th man playing SF and stretch PF according to opponent. Either Danny {or PG} would made a strong push for 6th man of the year, IMO. Quick way into the AS team for Paul and a great return path for Danny from injury as well as a trade boost at the deadline or off season.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          This isn't really an easy choice. In fact I think it is a choice that if not handled properly could mean the difference between a deep playoff running team and an early exit.
          I do appreciate you writing this. Not only does it reflect reality (as opposed to the thread title), but it outlines just what a challenge Frank Vogel has ahead. I'm believing he is up for it.

          Please know that my love for Lance's game, and my belief that his starting over Danny is at least worthy of discussion, by no means indicates I don't have appreciation and respect for Danny's game and his person. He's provided impeccable character his entire tenure, without exception really, he has exhibited some great basketball over the years, and his heart for competition and winning are huge.
          Last edited by McKeyFan; 09-21-2013, 11:38 AM.
          "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

            I could get used to seeing a lot of this over the next decade:



            It just seems like these two guys were born to play together. Same age, came into the league the same year, their games complement each other nicely, they are both very physical, etc etc. Let's not forget that though they are the same age, Paul already has two years of experience on Lance since Lance basically didn't play in his first two seasons here. I personally cannot wait to see how Lance looks because this is the first off-season in which he could improve his game based off of the experience of playing in real NBA games. That's way different than practicing in the summer when you sit on the bench all year. Lance now knows exactly what he needs to work on and I'm sure he's been doing it all summer.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              I could get used to seeing a lot of this over the next decade:



              It just seems like these two guys were born to play together. Same age, came into the league the same year, their games complement each other nicely, they are both very physical, etc etc. Let's not forget that though they are the same age, Paul already has two years of experience on Lance since Lance basically didn't play in his first two seasons here. I personally cannot wait to see how Lance looks because this is the first off-season in which he could improve his game based off of the experience of playing in real NBA games. That's way different than practicing in the summer when you sit on the bench all year. Lance now knows exactly what he needs to work on and I'm sure he's been doing it all summer.
              In my opinion, Lance needs to work first and foremost on his midrange pull up jumper. He creates space with ease, and that midrange jumper is there for him anytime he wants it. I remember when Bernard King would just score over and over again, like a broken record, on that midrange shot. That is available for Lance if he just practices the right way.
              "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 aamcguy View Post
                You're acting like LeBron was giving it everything he had to stop Lance from scoring. The reality is that he guarded Paul George more often than Lance and when he was guarding Lance he cheated off of him so much that he was always wide open whenever we actually had good ball movement. And if nobody on the Heat but LeBron could guard Lance surely he offensively outperformed his season averages? Surely if he was so dominant offensively we would go to him? Turns out he was wildly inefficient against the Heat. Hibbert was our star in that series. Paul George, West, and Hill also all outperformed Stephenson (in that series).

                As far as Danny's "empty stats on bad teams" ...what do you think our 2011-2012 season was? Danny Granger was a HUGE part of that season. We had a better winning percentage with Danny in this team and Lance riding the bench. Sure you could say we didn't make it to the conference finals the year before, but if Brooklyn had been marginally better we would have probably advanced to meet the Heat in the 2nd round where we probably would have again lost in 6-7 games. And let's not forget that Paul George improved, George Hill improved, and David West improved. Hibbert had a terrible start and a terrific end to the year offensively, but defensively he improved. Both benches were terrible. So when comparing Granger/Lance in that context Lance had a much better supporting cast than Granger did.

                Now when you say "Lance's day is coming," that may well be true. But the rest of your post indicates that Lance has already proven he's better. When he hasn't. It seems what Granger is guilty of is not having "game," which I'm guessing is a rough translation of "exciting." Lance has the potential to be an allstar, but Granger has proven he has the package that it takes to make it actually happen.

                It remains to be seen what Danny will give us this year, but Lance last year was not an upgrade over Danny two years ago.
                All very very good points. I feel like posts like these don't get paid enough attention.

                Obviously everyone has their own bias, but this is one of the better posts within this thread

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                  You're acting like LeBron was giving it everything he had to stop Lance from scoring. The reality is that he guarded Paul George more often than Lance and when he was guarding Lance he cheated off of him so much that he was always wide open whenever we actually had good ball movement. And if nobody on the Heat but LeBron could guard Lance surely he offensively outperformed his season averages? Surely if he was so dominant offensively we would go to him? Turns out he was wildly inefficient against the Heat. Hibbert was our star in that series. Paul George, West, and Hill also all outperformed Stephenson (in that series).

                  As far as Danny's "empty stats on bad teams" ...what do you think our 2011-2012 season was? Danny Granger was a HUGE part of that season. We had a better winning percentage with Danny in this team and Lance riding the bench. Sure you could say we didn't make it to the conference finals the year before, but if Brooklyn had been marginally better we would have probably advanced to meet the Heat in the 2nd round where we probably would have again lost in 6-7 games. And let's not forget that Paul George improved, George Hill improved, and David West improved. Hibbert had a terrible start and a terrific end to the year offensively, but defensively he improved. Both benches were terrible. So when comparing Granger/Lance in that context Lance had a much better supporting cast than Granger did.

                  Now when you say "Lance's day is coming," that may well be true. But the rest of your post indicates that Lance has already proven he's better. When he hasn't. It seems what Granger is guilty of is not having "game," which I'm guessing is a rough translation of "exciting." Lance has the potential to be an allstar, but Granger has proven he has the package that it takes to make it actually happen.

                  It remains to be seen what Danny will give us this year, but Lance last year was not an upgrade over Danny two years ago.
                  I would agree with you, but this isn't 2011 or 2012. It's not about "Lance last year". It's not about Danny two years ago. It's about the current situation including a surgically repaired knee and a young player beginning to break out. It is far from an "easy decision" and nobody in fact knows how it will turn out...so how can it be an easy decision?

                  Comment


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

                    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.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Agreed, but it's not just emotion. The reason I responded to the post is that it said Lance couldn't shoot. I then pointed out he had the 2nd best FG% on the team. That's not emotion.

                      Also, when I use a term like Lance's "game", that has nothing to do with him being "exciting" at all. It recognizes the fact Danny Granger struggles to dribble the basketball compared to Lance Stephenson. They are on different planets with that particular skill. Second, Lance is gifted at finding the open man and delivering the ball to allow an easy shot. IOW, Lance is far better at passing than Danny Granger.

                      So there you have it. Granger can shoot better than Lance, although Lance had the 2nd highest FG% on the team. But Lance can pass and dribble far better than Danny Granger. Then we can talk defense. I think Lance has the edge there as well. Just ask coach K about Danny's defense. Shooting, passing and dribbling are the core basketball skills on offense. Defense is half the game. Now if you look at it logically like that, Lance Stephenson has Danny beat on quite a bit of it.

                      IMO, I want the entire team to be better. I don't care if Granger or another player gets his seven 3 pointers and 28 points. This is crucial if you are to understand the Lance supporters' view. Lance's supporters know that guys like Jason Kidd and Steve Nash make your whole team better. While Kidd had a history of poor shooting, he could dribble and pass and defend very, very well. This made his teams much more successful. That is where "game" comes into the conversation when it comes to winning them. It's not about excitement. It's about winning.

                      Then you have the fact Granger is unlikely to come back 100%, Lance is now only 23 years old...about as old as Granger when he entered the league....Lance should certainly improve.

                      Then, after all this, you have someone say this is an easy decision. That's bound to cause emotions to flow, so perhaps the blame needs to go to the writer for that.
                      Why would I ask Coach K about Danny's defense....Oh right, the same Coach K who selected Danny Granger for team USA. I don't care how many min. he played, he was selected & oh btw RaJon Rondo was sent home for.

                      You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is: Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less well known is this: Never use making team USA as a fault when trying to argue against Danny Granger.

                      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.


                      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 Peck View Post
                        If your argument is that the title of the article is a fallacy then I will agree with you. This isn't really an easy choice. In fact I think it is a choice that if not handled properly could mean the difference between a deep playoff running team and an early exit.
                        The reason it isn't an easy choice is because they bring different skill sets.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          Why would I ask Coach K about Danny's defense....Oh right, the same Coach K who selected Danny Granger for team USA. I don't care how many min. he played, he was selected & oh btw RaJon Rondo was sent home for.

                          You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is: Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less well known is this: Never use making team USA as a fault when trying to argue against Danny Granger.

                          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 didn't know Rondo was an small forward ...
                          @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 Peck View Post
                            Why would I ask Coach K about Danny's defense....Oh right, the same Coach K who selected Danny Granger for team USA. I don't care how many min. he played, he was selected & oh btw RaJon Rondo was sent home for.

                            You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is: Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less well known is this: Never use making team USA as a fault when trying to argue against Danny Granger.

                            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 thought the same thing when I read this. It's like comparing Danny's all star game numbers to Lance. It doesn't matter what his numbers where he made an all star team and he made team USA. That only shows that he's been on a completely higher level then Lance most likely ever will be. Comparing skill sets of a guard to a bigger forward isn't a good comparison of who has "game" either. I would only expect the smaller guard to have better dribbling and passing skills. Hill has better dribbling and passing skills then Hibbert but I don't think he has a better game. Granger is a better post defender and overall better defender then Lance. The combination of PG/Granger is a better defensive combination then that of PG/Lance against most matchups and especially against the Heat. Danny is a slightly better rebounder and far better scorer not just a better shooter. I'll take those skill sets in the starting and closing lineups.

                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              I didn't know Rondo was an small forward ...
                              He did not pick players by traditional position, in fact it would not have shocked me if he would have used Danny as a center. Yea, I'm not thrilled with the system he uses at all to be honest with you in fact I pretty much hate it.


                              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 Peck View Post
                                He did not pick players by traditional position, in fact it would not have shocked me if he would have used Danny as a center. Yea, I'm not thrilled with the system he uses at all to be honest with you in fact I pretty much hate it.
                                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.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X