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

Sit Scola until March

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

  • #16
    Re: Sit Scola until March

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    its called practice. Vogel had no problem going from Solo to OJ to Butler getting PT before Danny got back because guys weren't playing well. If Cope was doing better in practice, he would probably be making a better case for PT. But since he only gets garbage time, its pretty clear he's just not working out like they thought.
    Solo/OJ/Butler are in a little different positions in their career than Luis. Sitting him because his shot hasn't been falling would be a huge blow to him IMHO. It would be better to let him play through it and get it figured out, than possibly burning a bridge.

    A health concern is an easier sell than just telling him he's playing awful. I look at it this way, he's still giving better production than Tyler.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Sit Scola until March

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      The second unit isn't going because Scola can't shoot with a bad elbow. There's no reason not to rest him and get that back to 100% before the playoffs.
      Yea, blame Scola's presumed elbow injury for the lack of production by the Pacers bench...
      Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Sit Scola until March

        So... I still like this idea.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Sit Scola until March

          Sit him until his contract is up is also an idea.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Sit Scola until March

            It really is frustrating how JOBesque Frank is about playing Scola over Cope. Cope needs the PT, and it looks like Scola could really use the rest.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Sit Scola until March

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              It really is frustrating how JOBesque Frank is about playing Scola over Cope. Cope needs the PT, and it looks like Scola could really use the rest.
              The way Vogel constantly rolls out Scola over Copeland, you'd think he owes money to a drug cartel run by Luis Scola or something.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Sit Scola until March

                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                The way Vogel constantly rolls out Scola over Copeland, you'd think he owes money to a drug cartel run by Luis Scola or something.
                For all the flack Hansbrough caught for his offense, Scola sure has gotten a pass this year. Is he getting older? Is the Pacers bench cursed? Well get this, Scola is shooting his career worst field goal percentage at 46.1%, while Hansbrough is at a career high at 48.6%. They are both top 30ish in the league in defensive rating but I still think that Hansbrough is the more adequate defender, but the numbers say only slightly I guess. Hansbrough also gets to the line twice as much as Scola and he has a Ts% of 57.8 compared to Scola's 49.7%. Hansbrough also caught a lot of flack for his turnovers but he has a turnover ratio of 13.5 and Scola's is 14.1 this year.

                To be fair to Scola in his prime he was a better player than Hansbrough but this year it seems to me the stats indicate the Raptors are getting more out of Hansbrough than we are getting out of Scola. Scola may still be just as good or better than old Hansy, though the stats indicate otherwise, but he is dying on our bench just like Green, Augustin, and Plumlee last year and maybe Granger this year. Maybe Turner is next. Sure we are the better team, but I think we would be even better with Hansbrough and Granger compared to Scola and Turner off the bench. Don't even compare Granger's and Turner's advanced stats. You'll be in for a rude awakening.

                I think Bird has been missing on some things lately and the Granger trade could have hurt the chemistry to the point that we are in full crisis mode. If Granger was really wanting to stay here this year and compete for a championship, Bird should have let him and kept his promise not to trade him. Especially in his only year contributing on a true contender. If not and Granger was happy to get traded knowing he would get cut and go back home to LA, then I could be wrong. Also add in the fact we gave up Plumlee who we could have stashed on the bench as a cheap option to take over for Ian when/if we trade him. Also the fact that Hansbrough got pretty much the exact same deal from Toronto makes me think Bird was going to rescind his offer and he let Tyler know so he could opt out and maintain some dignity and possible leverage. Still replacing him with Scola hasn't panned out in my opinion based on the stats, especially when you consider we gave up Plumlee to do it. Green was deserving to get traded, but we never even gave Miles a chance.

                I'm glad that they all are doing well on other teams though and for most of them it was in their best interests I guess.
                Last edited by Midcoasted; 03-10-2014, 10:13 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Sit Scola until March

                  Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                  For all the flack Hansbrough caught for his offense, Scola sure has gotten a pass this year. Is he getting older? Is the Pacers bench cursed? Well get this, Scola is shooting his career worst field goal percentage at 46.1%, while Hansbrough is at a career high at 48.6%. They are both top 30ish in the league in defensive rating but I still think that Hansbrough is the more adequate defender, but the numbers say only slightly I guess. Hansbrough also gets to the line twice as much as Scola and he has a Ts% of 57.8 compared to Scola's 49.7%. Hansbrough also caught a lot of flack for his turnovers but he has a turnover ratio of 13.5 and Scola's is 14.1 this year.

                  To be fair to Scola in his prime he was a better player than Hansbrough but this year it seems to me the stats indicate the Raptors are getting more out of Hansbrough than we are getting out of Scola. Scola may still be just as good or better than old Hansy, though the stats indicate otherwise, but he is dying on our bench just like Green, Augustin, and Plumlee last year and maybe Granger this year. Maybe Turner is next. Sure we are the better team, but I think we would be even better with Hansbrough and Granger compared to Scola and Turner off the bench. Don't even compare Granger's and Turner's advanced stats. You'll be in for a rude awakening.

                  I think Bird has been missing on some things lately and the Granger trade could have hurt the chemistry to the point that we are in full crisis mode. If Granger was really wanting to stay here this year and compete for a championship, Bird should have let him and kept his promise not to trade him. Especially in his only year contributing on a true contender. If not and Granger was happy to get traded knowing he would get cut and go back home to LA, then I could be wrong. Also add in the fact we gave up Plumlee who we could have stashed on the bench as a cheap option to take over for Ian when/if we trade him. Also the fact that Hansbrough got pretty much the exact same deal from Toronto makes me think Bird was going to rescind his offer and he let Tyler know so he could opt out and maintain some dignity and possible leverage. Still replacing him with Scola hasn't panned out in my opinion based on the stats, especially when you consider we gave up Plumlee to do it. Green was deserving to get traded, but we never even gave Miles a chance.

                  I'm glad that they all are doing well on other teams though and for most of them it was in their best interests I guess.




                  Scola gave us great stuff early in the season. The trade was worth it to me. Tyler had reached his ceiling. At least Scola takes better shots. And when he's on, hits a ton of them. Tyler was just goofy, and threw up wild stuff. He had no form or rythm on his shot. But Scola played B-ball last Summer in Argentina. Hence he had NO OFF SEASON. He is getting fatigued at about the right time. Frank needs to adjust, bench him, and play Copeland.

                  Turner for Granger was a good trade. Mostly because we also got LaVoy Allen. He could easily back up Roy and be our back up for next year. LaVoy can shoot. Plumlee can't. And probably never will learn. Turner is an excellent passer. Frank needs to run more plays for him. Jumpers off screens, and post ups. That's where he's strongest. Also using picks off the dribble and getting to the rim, ala Celtics game. Our coach is either inept, or too lazy to come up with positive situations for our players to thrive in.


                  Augustine has been on many teams. He's thriving in Chicago. Great. Where was that in Charlotte, Toronto, etc? Green had his shot in Indy. He should've been prepared. He blew it. He's doing great in Phoenix. But they don't play defense. What's gonna happen if Green shoots bad next season? Green seems to be one of those players who will have up and down years. In a way, he reminds me of Corey Maggette. Corey was never good enough to be a franchise player anywhere.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Sit Scola until March

                    Larry fell in love with a guy years ago and did whatever he had to to get him w/o considering that hey, he's about to be 34 and not really that good anymore. Is what it is, Green's doing great in PHX but he was awful here, terrible fit, and it cleared money, he didn't want to include Plumlee but that was the entry cost to get them to take Green (they're lying if they say anything about expecting Green to play like he has), but the 1st rounder too? We got housed.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Sit Scola until March

                      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                      Larry fell in love with a guy years ago and did whatever he had to to get him w/o considering that hey, he's about to be 34 and not really that good anymore. Is what it is, Green's doing great in PHX but he was awful here, terrible fit, and it cleared money, he didn't want to include Plumlee but that was the entry cost to get them to take Green (they're lying if they say anything about expecting Green to play like he has), but the 1st rounder too? We got housed.

                      Why? Ist rounder would've added salary. In a year where we wanna re-sign Lance. Green can fit in many systems. Phoenix, NY, GSW. But not in Indy, Chicago, or Miami. His bad shot taking would drive people nuts.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Sit Scola until March

                        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                        Scola gave us great stuff early in the season. The trade was worth it to me. Tyler had reached his ceiling. At least Scola takes better shots. And when he's on, hits a ton of them. Tyler was just goofy, and threw up wild stuff. He had no form or rythm on his shot. But Scola played B-ball last Summer in Argentina. Hence he had NO OFF SEASON. He is getting fatigued at about the right time. Frank needs to adjust, bench him, and play Copeland.

                        Turner for Granger was a good trade. Mostly because we also got LaVoy Allen. He could easily back up Roy and be our back up for next year. LaVoy can shoot. Plumlee can't. And probably never will learn. Turner is an excellent passer. Frank needs to run more plays for him. Jumpers off screens, and post ups. That's where he's strongest. Also using picks off the dribble and getting to the rim, ala Celtics game. Our coach is either inept, or too lazy to come up with positive situations for our players to thrive in.


                        Augustine has been on many teams. He's thriving in Chicago. Great. Where was that in Charlotte, Toronto, etc? Green had his shot in Indy. He should've been prepared. He blew it. He's doing great in Phoenix. But they don't play defense. What's gonna happen if Green shoots bad next season? Green seems to be one of those players who will have up and down years. In a way, he reminds me of Corey Maggette. Corey was never good enough to be a franchise player anywhere.

                        I agree that Allen is the wildcard. He has great potential and could be the back up four so my Hansbrough rant may be moot. But he still hasn't played for us and who knows what a year on our bench would look like for him. If West ages or goes down I am not sure he could step in those shoes. I know it is a limited sample size but Hansbrough was actually pretty good with starters and we didn't miss a beat, whether it was because of spacing or Roy's presence or whatever. I still believe he is the reason for smash mouth basketball ever coming about in Indiana. He just wasn't as effective as a bench player for us as he was a starter, but I believe Hansbrough could have fit right in with the starters if something happened to West and we could have groomed a younger guy like LaVoy to be the eventual replacement. I really don't think LaVoy could step right in and we not miss a beat like Hansbrough did and just about average a double double when starting but I could be wrong.

                        But to say the he could step in for Roy? I don't think that would work out so well. Hibbert is a serious contender in the DPOY discussion this year for a reason. West is better than Hansbrough and the leadership and toughness he has provided for our team is invaluable, but I was comfortable as having Hansbrough as a back up plan even though he was bad on the bench just like every single other bench player for us. He was good for us as a starter pre West and when he filled in for him for a few games. I have no reason to believe he could not have maintained that success if given a chance to start next to an improved Hibbert.

                        Scola just wasn't worth it. We could have just given Hansbrough a 2 or 3 year deal with a team option and saved Plumlee for insurance and kept our first round pick. That pick will be vital to filling out our bench because we are limited in cap space. Sure odds are that pick isn't worth much but look where we got Stephenson. You can't win if you don't play. And I seriously don't think a one year rental on an aging Scola has improved our record at all this year.

                        This is all just my opinion of course.
                        Last edited by Midcoasted; 03-11-2014, 12:17 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Sit Scola until March

                          Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                          Why? Ist rounder would've added salary. In a year where we wanna re-sign Lance. Green can fit in many systems. Phoenix, NY, GSW. But not in Indy, Chicago, or Miami. His bad shot taking would drive people nuts.
                          Where we are picking that pick would not cost us much cash. And then there was always the potential it could have been used in a more effective way. To possibly package with Mahinmi this summer? Then we have Plumlee as the back up to Roy and 4 more million to keep Lance. Maybe because Ian is good defensively he will be an easy move, but teams may try to gouge us because they know we are strapped for cash to re-sign Lance. That pick would have been a good leverage piece for us. I guess we always have future picks to trade, but how do we fill out our roster with limited money in the future? I'm sure it will pan out.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Sit Scola until March

                            The guy is done, Cope should play but Vogel doesnt have the balls to make that switch. Was Vogel consulted at all when they signed Cope? Cause the way Cope is paid it seemed like we had confidence that he was going to play, send him out there and give him a shot for a couple games. There isnt a thing that he is going to do worse than Scola. If his defense is bad then its just as good as Scola's is.

                            Scola has been playing like an absolute joke the past couple months. Watching his defense on the PNR against the Mavs the other night was making me sick. At one point he screened Turner for the Mavs and made Lance leave his man and they hit a 3.

                            But could this be a bigger issue? Our bench is a graveyard. We can bring a 25 year old Larry Bird on our bench and he would forget how to play basketball. Is it how Vogel uses the bench? His set rotations are starting to get really old, no feel for the game he just sends people out there no matter what is happening.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Sit Scola until March

                              Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                              Sit him until his contract is up is also an idea.
                              Yeah, but it's a pretty awfull idea .

                              I'm all for sitting Scola for a little while and giving his minutes to both Copeland and Allen to experiment on a very limited scale.
                              Last edited by Mourning; 03-11-2014, 06:07 AM.
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Sit Scola until March

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                I agree that Allen is the wildcard. He has great potential and could be the back up four so my Hansbrough rant may be moot. But he still hasn't played for us and who knows what a year on our bench would look like for him. If West ages or goes down I am not sure he could step in those shoes. I know it is a limited sample size but Hansbrough was actually pretty good with starters and we didn't miss a beat, whether it was because of spacing or Roy's presence or whatever. I still believe he is the reason for smash mouth basketball ever coming about in Indiana. He just wasn't as effective as a bench player for us as he was a starter, but I believe Hansbrough could have fit right in with the starters if something happened to West and we could have groomed a younger guy like LaVoy to be the eventual replacement. I really don't think LaVoy could step right in and we not miss a beat like Hansbrough did and just about average a double double when starting but I could be wrong.

                                But to say the he could step in for Roy? I don't think that would work out so well. Hibbert is a serious contender in the DPOY discussion this year for a reason. West is better than Hansbrough and the leadership and toughness he has provided for our team is invaluable, but I was comfortable as having Hansbrough as a back up plan even though he was bad on the bench just like every single other bench player for us. He was good for us as a starter pre West and when he filled in for him for a few games. I have no reason to believe he could not have maintained that success if given a chance to start next to an improved Hibbert.

                                Scola just wasn't worth it. We could have just given Hansbrough a 2 or 3 year deal with a team option and saved Plumlee for insurance and kept our first round pick. That pick will be vital to filling out our bench because we are limited in cap space. Sure odds are that pick isn't worth much but look where we got Stephenson. You can't win if you don't play. And I seriously don't think a one year rental on an aging Scola has improved our record at all this year.

                                This is all just my opinion of course.



                                Scola did great off our bench early in the season. But he's been bad for a month and a half now. Like I said, I think he's tired and little nagging injuries. He's also 34, and played ball last Summer. He had NO OFF-SEASON. Scola was gonna get bogged down before playoff time, period. Happens to most 34 year olds who play ball in the Summer overseas. And then the regular season. That's why Copeland is vital now. The front office needs to have a talk with Frank about playing Copeland. They signed him for a reason.

                                As for Plumlee, yeah he's an energy guy but lets be honest. The Suns don't think THAT much of him. That's why they were trying to pry Gasol from the Lakers before the deadline. Also when he was drafted, we needed shooting. I think trading him was also a way for the front office to get rid of a pick most fans were unhappy with. Yes, he would've been a cheaper option than Ian, but Walsh signed Ian. Not Larry. That's his fault.

                                I just said LaVoy could back up Roy because LaVoy is a PF/C combo. And it allows Cope to be on the floor at the PF spot. Both Cope and LaVoy have range on their shot. Although Cope's range is deeper and more consistent. LaVoy's range is 15 inward.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X