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

Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

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

  • #76
    Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    Its not that he is a rookie, not that we are a title contender, and its not that we have Danny and Lance ahead of him. Its all of it together. And this isn't a Kwahi Leonard situation even. Who were the Spurs going to start instead of Kwahi really? He was their best option because he was their best player at SF and the best fit in the SF spot with the starters. Solo is not a better player than Danny or Lance.
    I think you are misunderstanding what he is arguing for. All he is arguing for is not dismissing the idea based solely on him being a rookie. Him starting or not starting should be based on how he plays and what he brings to the equation, not on him being a rookie. He isn't arguing that he should start, only not to dismiss the idea without knowing how good he is or what he brings.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      That's such a straw man argument. It would be like saying that Vogel was narrow minded last year by not starting Hansbrough all season. Hey, we would have had a much better bench with D. West.
      That's not such a good comparison. Our offense revolves a lot around post players and throwing Hans out there to begin the game would add a lot of pressure to Hibbert. We need West's contribution since he is a very important offensive player for our system.

      Lance, on the other hand, was the 5th option last year and was great at it. He defended well, he grabbed rebounds and when he had the chance he tried to create. He made nice off-ball cuts and got open for layups or 3s. He excelled in this role and I think that it's very plausible that Vogel is going to give him a promotion. Don't be fooled. Starting Lance at the bench wouldn't be a demotion. He would have the keys to the 2nd unit offense and he could develop his shot creating and shot making ability. Solo would just be a 3 & D guy and play 10-15 minutes maximum.

      It would just be nice for Lance to be tasked to do more things offensively. That's all.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        I'm not saying you are. Go ahead and consider it. I'd hope and expect that the Pacers' coaching staff considers every option.

        But at the end of the day, there aren't enough minutes for Solomon Hill to get major minutes this year without foul trouble or an injury. I don't doubt that he's capable of playing bigger minutes this year, but I do doubt that he's good enough to take minutes away from Danny, Lance, or Paul George.
        Even if he starts, I imagine he'd only play 10-12 minutes a game.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
          But what he showed on Saturday did not convince me he should play ahead of Danny or Lance in any capacity, let alone in the starting 5.
          People seem to be mistaking "starting the game" with "being ahead of someone in the rotation". It's not the same, though. Danny and Lance would still play the majority of minutes.

          What I'd consider a good idea is the following:

          Have Solo start at the beggining of each half. Use him as a defensive stopper and only give him 5-7 minutes each half.

          That could give us the following advantages:

          1) Allow Paul George to get going defensively without having to cover our opponent's best offensive player at the start of the game.

          2) When PG gets tired or when he's inefficient, we replace Solo with one of Lance / Danny and renew our offensive firepower.

          3) When it's time for PG to get his rest, we can insert the player that we didn't insert earlier and refresh our offensive power yet again.

          That would allow us to have steady offensive production from our wing position. Give the fact that we're probably going to have some steady offensive production from our post players (Roy, West, Scola) then that combo would make our offense very potent.

          That's my idea, of course. And it does revolve around Solo being a defensive stopper which would be extremely hard for a rookie. So, I can admit that the idea is far-fetched.

          But if it was possible, it would be awesome, wouldn't it?
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            I wonder what is OJ thinking about all this? anybody knows what happened to him? Did he even play last game? I want to see more OJ.
            He only played 3 minutes but I want to see some more OJ as well. He looked great in SL.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              I'm not saying you are. Go ahead and consider it. I'd hope and expect that the Pacers' coaching staff considers every option.

              But at the end of the day, there aren't enough minutes for Solomon Hill to get major minutes this year without foul trouble or an injury. I don't doubt that he's capable of playing bigger minutes this year, but I do doubt that he's good enough to take minutes away from Danny, Lance, or Paul George.
              So you doubt Larry Bird, coach Vogel, the coaching staff, and the other Pacers players that have spent the last couple of months with him and all seem to be singing a much different tune....

              Gotcha...

              As with Sollozzo...I think I'll tend to go with the basketball experts in our franchise that are being paid huge amounts of money to make such assessments over an internet message board addict whose seen a few minutes played in a couple games in Summer League and 21 minutes in his first preseason game....and thats assuming you were able to watch all the aforementioned....

              The highly paid trained-eye experts who have spent alot of time working with the kid are saying glowing things about him....im excited about that...on top of every thing else we have to be excited about...and if they say theyre even considering starting him, all the better...while i find it unlikely, im again excited that hes shown himself well enough to have the people i trust consider such...after all, Vogel, Bird and company have steered us pretty well so far wouldnt you agree? To categorically dismiss what theyre saying as being nothing more than mindless banter makes zero sense...but you do so if it makes u feel better...it certainly wont be the first time and most likely wont be the last...
              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                How does not starting them make them get more time on the court? Who starts, and who comes off the bench, won't determine how many minutes they'll get. Vogel has already said both of them will get starter minutes, so I don't think it really matters. I would bet that two out of the three (PG, Danny, Lance) will always be on the court, or atleast on the court 90% of the time.
                You are right, I didn't express myself correctly there. It doesn't make them get more time per se so you're right in questioning that.

                But it does help in managing their collective minutes better. By using this method we're not using offensive creativity when our back-up wings enter the game because we will insert players that have this offensive creativity. This move would be all about keeping a stable stream of offensive power, imo.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                  Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                  Whats the point of starting someone who will play only 10 minutes a game? Wouldn't that just screw up chemistry? Oh we are gonna start with this guy, but in 3 minutes he will be off the court and you will play with this guy instead...
                  That's not necessarily the case.

                  The players that develop chemistry between them is the players that play the most together. If Roy - West - George - Lance / Danny - George Hill is the unit that plays the most minutes together (they should be and they will be regardless who starts) then this is the unit that will develop the most chemistry.

                  Several teams have used a pinch starter for purely strategical reasons that played less minutes than the player that was replacing him. A prime example was the OKC Thunder when Harden was there. Sefolosha was starting for the same reasons that Hill would start for us if this was about to happen. He was used as a defensive stopper and Harden came in and kept the offense fresh when Westbrook was tired.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                    So you doubt Larry Bird, coach Vogel, the coaching staff, and the other Pacers players that have spent the last couple of months with him and all seem to be singing a much different tune....

                    Gotcha...
                    Yes, that's what I said. Glad your reading comprehension's on par with your sentence construction.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      Lance, on the other hand, was the 5th option last year and was great at it. He defended well, he grabbed rebounds and when he had the chance he tried to create. He made nice off-ball cuts and got open for layups or 3s. He excelled in this role and I think that it's very plausible that Vogel is going to give him a promotion. Don't be fooled. Starting Lance at the bench wouldn't be a demotion. He would have the keys to the 2nd unit offense and he could develop his shot creating and shot making ability. Solo would just be a 3 & D guy and play 10-15 minutes maximum.

                      It would just be nice for Lance to be tasked to do more things offensively. That's all.
                      Nuntius, I get where you're going here but I object strenuously to it. You've made a couple underlying assumptions that I feel are bad ones.

                      1. There is no "second unit." It doesn't exist. We have the best starting 5 in THE ENTIRE LEAGUE, we're not going to win games by having them on the bench for long stretches of time. We should have 3 or 4 of our top 7 players out there at all times. Getting away from "2nd unit" mentality is part of what helped us play so well near the end of the year. There were always a couple starters on the floor.

                      2. Lance did very well in that role, I agree. We know he can do well in that role. So what does Solo give you in that spot that Lance does not? Not a thing.

                      3. How are you giving Lance a promotion by cutting his minutes?
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        He only played 3 minutes but I want to see some more OJ as well. He looked great in SL.
                        That's crazy talk. Where are you going to get minutes for Solomon Hill plus OJ?
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          That's not necessarily the case.

                          The players that develop chemistry between them is the players that play the most together. If Roy - West - George - Lance / Danny - George Hill is the unit that plays the most minutes together (they should be and they will be regardless who starts) then this is the unit that will develop the most chemistry.

                          Several teams have used a pinch starter for purely strategical reasons that played less minutes than the player that was replacing him. A prime example was the OKC Thunder when Harden was there. Sefolosha was starting for the same reasons that Hill would start for us if this was about to happen. He was used as a defensive stopper and Harden came in and kept the offense fresh when Westbrook was tired.
                          Yes...theres a lot of reasons that it could possibly be being considered...and its a luxury that rarely is available to teams...i have a feeling if all goes as planned in Vogels mind that fans will probably be surprised at the amount of minutes being played by each player...with the quality of depth that appears to be in place, im sure a lot of thought has been given to reducing everyones minutes so that they are more fresh during their time on the floor and consequently more fresh at the end of the season for a championship run...

                          As has been mentioned people seemed to be equating who is the fifth starter with who is the best player and who will play the most amount of minutes...the fact Vogel is considering starting S. Hill does not mean hes better than Lance or Danny and it doesnt mean he will be playing typical starter minutes...what it more likely would mean is he would get his 10-15 minutes at the start of each half against the other teams best players and it could also mean that Hill is actually a better compliment to the other 4 starters given the makeup of those 4....u then couple that with the fact that the offensive games of Granger and Lance could be more fully utilized when some of subs are in, u then almost have a perfect storm where something could be considered...

                          Is S. Hill a better defender than Lance and Granger...we really dont know that, but we have heard so much about his understanding team defensive principles and being able to get in the right places etc....if indeed he is a better defender than the other two, then you would be starting your 2 best wing defenders....which cant be bad against the other teams starters...you then couple that with him being able to go all out on the defensive end for those 5 or 6 minutes to start each half-something the other 2 guys simply wont be able to do...and you again have an interesting scenario...he would have the ability to wear out one of the opposing teams starting wings with relentless defensive pressure...you then have the domino effect of Lance and Granger going up against 2nd stringers for more minutes than they otherwise would...that cant be bad...and the whole idea is that you gain that advantage while not only not giving up anything but possibly becoming more efficient as a starting unit due to possibly having a better complement...

                          Which leads to another key point....passing and post entry passing....we have heard quite a bit about what a great passer S. Hill is....Danny is certainly not known for such....and while lance is certainly one of the best passers on the team, lance is certainly more effective with the ball in his hands alot....something that will be harder to get playing alongside the other 4 starters...but not as hard when playing with some of the subs...and this team has struggled to make entry passes to Hibbert...so if S. Hill can improve the post entry passing, improve the overall defensive effectiveness of the starters, wear out and frustrate a starting opposing wing, and hit an occasional 3...that should free things up more for Danny and Lance with the second unit and then everyone should be more fresh at the end of games...

                          Its and intersting concept and discussion....is it likely? in the end i still guess no...but almost everyone in the organization points to it being a worthwhile discussion....and it sure would seem to be better than talking about Dannys knee all the time...and should be exciting that we can even discuss such after the quality of our bench the last couple of years...everyone considers the only reason we failed to win a championship was because of our bench...if youre able to somehow improve the overall effectiveness of the starting 5-not by getting a better player but by adding a better complement....and then have a bench that consists of Lance, Danny, Scola, Watson, Ian, and Copeland you cant help but think thats one of the best benches in the league and a complete opposite from last year...

                          Fun stuff to consider...
                          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Even if he starts, I imagine he'd only play 10-12 minutes a game.
                            Great. Let's run with that.

                            For the sake of discussion, let's assume that Copeland never plays a single minute at the 3, and George Hill never plays a single minute at the 2. Let's further assume that Pulp gets no minutes all year long. I feel comfortable in saying those are unrealistically conservative assumptions, but they're designed to create the most hypothetical space possible for Solomon Hill.

                            If Copeland/G.Hill/OJ get no wing minutes, then there are 96 minutes a game available at the 2 and 3 positions. How are we going to divvy those out?

                            - If we give Solomon Hill 12 minutes a game, there are 84 minutes left for our franchise player, our Captain, and our up-and-coming freight train.

                            - Paul George played 37 minutes a game last year. Let's say we drop him all the way down to 34 minutes a game. That leaves 50 minutes a game for Lance and Granger.

                            - Last year, Lance played 29.2 minutes a game. After the first month of the season, he never averaged fewer than 30 minutes a game. I'd argue that based on Lance's progression as a player, he should get more minutes this year, not fewer. Let's give him a bump all the way to 32 minutes a game.

                            - That leaves 18 minutes a game for the Captain. Unless it's under medical orders, that number simply makes no sense. If he's healthy enough to produce, he's gonna need more minutes than that. And if he's not healthy enough to produce, then 18 minutes a game is too high.

                            It's not about the starting spot. There just aren't enough minutes for Solo unless he's actually outproducing the three guys ahead of him. I like him and have never had a problem with the pick. We're gonna be really glad that we have him next year when we lose Danny. But in the meantime, it's simply not feasible to me that there are minutes available for him.
                            Last edited by Anthem; 10-07-2013, 08:20 PM.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Nuntius, I get where you're going here but I object strenuously to it. You've made a couple underlying assumptions that I feel are bad ones.

                              1. There is no "second unit." It doesn't exist. We have the best starting 5 in THE ENTIRE LEAGUE, we're not going to win games by having them on the bench for long stretches of time. We should have 3 or 4 of our top 7 players out there at all times. Getting away from "2nd unit" mentality is part of what helped us play so well near the end of the year. There were always a couple starters on the floor.

                              2. Lance did very well in that role, I agree. We know he can do well in that role. So what does Solo give you in that spot that Lance does not? Not a thing.

                              3. How are you giving Lance a promotion by cutting his minutes?
                              Thats odd...I didnt realize the goal was to get Lance a promotion...I thought it was to win a title.

                              Now that being said...His minutes wouldnt necessarily have to change that much...more importantly, if minutes are the focus, then someone has lost sight of the goal...however in this scenario, he likely would spend alot more time as something other than the 5 option...with the ball in his hands more often...and most likely more opportunities to impact the game. So one could certainly argue that would a "promotion" of sorts...

                              As for what S. Hill might give you...well...thats just it...S. Hll might give you the opportunity to move Lance to a position where he can do all of the above things and thus impact the game and the outcome that much more...without the starting unit taking a hit...because he is potentially a better defender...and just as good of a facilitator...and seemingly a better 3 point shooter-though that certainly remains to be seen...

                              As for the whole second unit thing not existing...time will tell....Vogel has definitely shown a desire to have such....but a lack of talent finally forced him out of that..either way thats not really whats been suggested...I dont think anyone has discussed the possibility of S. Hill starting...playing typical starters minutes...and finishing games with the starters....because that certainly seems even less likely
                              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Danny Granger to come off the bench in Saturday's game

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                It's a bad idea to take minutes from Granger or Stephenson for player development if it means not getting homecourt advantage throughout the playoffs. Solomon Hill is an impressive kid that will develop well over the next year even if he's not force-fed minutes.
                                I cannot talk on behalf of cinomitz (although, I believe that his vision is not far from mine) but I'm not suggesting to take minutes away from Granger and Stephenson and force-feed them to Solo. That would not be a good idea, indeed.

                                What I'm saying is that playing Solo at the 5 first minutes of each half would possibly lead to better minute management for both Lance and Granger. It could possibly help us exploit their offensive talent in a better way. Instead of using them as 4th and 5th option alongside our starters we could use them as the 1st and 2nd option of our bench a bit more. That's what I'm suggesting.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X