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

Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 8
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 template Next
  • #1

    Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

    Again, this isn’t rocket science. Our team shot 38% from the field which in reality is exactly what the Hawks shot from the field. However the Hawks hit more free throws than our team attempted and thus most likely the game was decided.

    Actually that isn’t totally accurate because there were several other issues but the free throw disparity was pretty bad. Obviously Tony Brother’s aka worst referee in the history of the world was up to his usual idiocy but make no mistake the refs did not dictate the outcome of this game. Our own inadequacy did us in.

    Let’s go back to that field goal % for a min. The truth is that it is very skewed because West, Stephenson & Scola shot a combined 55% from the field. The rest of our team combined to shoot an astronomical 22% from the field.

    You are going to beat no one if the majority of your team is shooting 22% from the floor.

    So I will go once again to what I have said for the past month and a half, we have no one who can consistently step up and hit an open face up jump shot. Thus teams can pack the paint on us, however for the most part that is not what occurred tonight.

    The Hawks actually took advantage of our other great weaknesses poor dribbling, inability to handle pressure, less than average passing ability and lack of off the ball movement. They simply played up on us all night long pressuring us and often times trapping us, causing us to throw poor sloppy passes, dribble into pressure and burn clock.

    In other words they are just simply using every single weakness that we have and are making us pay for it. Full credit to their coaching staff, they have scouted us perfectly and know what we can and can not do. Nobody pulled a Luis Scola game tonight; even though Luis himself was great he just simply did not hit the majority of his shots from the elbow. So we never spread the floor and we just can not establish any form of low post offense. This goes well beyond Hibbert btw, West hasn’t been Kareem like either for that matter.

    So we end up taking force contested distance jumpers and thus never draw contact and when you are shooting 22% for the most part well, the results really shouldn’t surprise anyone. In fact if we should be surprised at all it should be that we kept it as close as we did.

    I say all of that above as though these were the only issues. They obviously are not, however they simply are the most glaring IMO.

    In all honesty in the off season, if this goes how it looks like it is going to go, I fully expect Frank to be gone. I won’t like it but I won’t be able to really argue against it. On the other hand while I really like Birds take no prisoner attitude regarding wanting a title and I do believe he really tried to improve the team this year I will say this. I think I’m ready for him to go as well, just as long as he is not replaced by Walsh.

    The reason for my thinking this? Simply put I am tired of his disdain for point guards.

    Think about it for a min. In all of the years here, when was the last time Larry Bird drafted a point guard? When you think of one please let me know.

    I think this is just a bias he has from his days in Boston when they were simply built around their dynamic front court and they would just rotate guys in and out to play the point but none of them were ever really ball handling point guards. Tiny Archibald was probably the closest he ever had and he was already old when Bird got there.

    After watching us get trapped bringing the ball up the court for what seemed like the 100th time I was lamenting the entire slew of both superstar and well great point guards in the NBA today and we do not have a single one of them on our team.

    I like C.J. Watson and he is a great backup point guard, however that is what he is a backup point guard.

    Hill even says himself he is not a point guard and yes I know our offense doesn’t work with traditional point guards. Well I’m here to tell you our offense doesn’t work period, so next season I really truly want us to do almost anything in our power to bring in a point guard and I’m not talking another run of the mill backup quality point who we will run with the starters. When we have to bust some of this up and retool, which is what is going to have to happen if this does go down in flames like it is looking, then we need to be willing to look at trading some players who we didn’t think were tradable for a dynamic point guard.

    But that is the future, we still have to slug our way through the rest of this.

    I honestly am just at the point where I don’t even know what to say beyond the obvious faults with our offense. I know we aren’t supposed to look at body language but, well if we did we would be none to pleased about what we saw.

    I mean in all honesty I told my wife in the first 30 seconds of the game that this was going to go to crap when Paul George ran to the corner and dribbled like he thought he was Curly Neal if Curly were blind and had a hook for a hand and proceeded to get trapped turning the ball over. Then going to the other end and then deciding that it would be a good idea to foul Kyle Korver in the act of shooting a three.

    I just new from there it was going to be a long night.

    As good as Paul played the other night and he was brilliant, he played just as bad tonight. If Lance had done on the first play of the game what Paul did there would be a lynch mob waiting for him at the hotel after the game from fans who would drive to Atlanta ready to hang him.

    Paul often times is as bad if not worse than Lance about holding the ball, causing no movement and then trying to bail himself out with his newly patented Jermaine O’Neal style turn around fade away jumper.

    The only thing I will say for him is that he did hit the glass hard. But beyond that he made DeMarre Carroll look like Paul Pierce.

    You know I wouldn’t find all of this so depressing if I thought for one second that the Hawks would roll into the second round and stomp whoever they played but I just absolutely believe that they will lose in round 2 either 4-1 or 4-2 at best.

    As you can tell I’m having a real hard time doing this one tonight. I just am at a loss and in all of my years of watching a team I have never EVER seen anything like this happen.

    Let’s just do grades and be done with it.

    Paul George: D

    Saved by his rebounding if not he would be headed for the F territory. Poor shot selection, poor dribbling and just idiotic passing. That one play where Hill dropped it was really only partly Hill’s fault, Paul threw him a crappy pass.

    David West: B

    Meh, he did okay. I think he twice passed up wide open jump shots to pass it to someone who had a worse shot than he did but on our team who can blame anyone for not wanting to shoot because the likely hood of it going in is not great.

    Roy Hibbert: F

    Sad

    George Hill: F—

    Not getting nearly enough blame. His lack of energy is what drives me insane sometimes as I could not tell you one single thing he did tonight other than miss a crap load of shots.

    Lance Stephenson: B

    Made his own mini run in the 4th to try and keep us in the game. His run was however matched by back to back threes by Atlanta so while he got us a little closer we were never able to overcome the deficit. With our offense I always worry when we get down by 6 or more and I’m not even joking. I do not believe we have the offense to often times over come a 6 point lead. Lance also hit the boards and he was a little more active on defense than he was the other night.

    Luis Scola: B

    Hit some shots and on our team that means a whole lot. Wasn’t hitting that face up jumper as much but certainly hit them with a variety of shots and again was part of the lineup that brought us back into the game. So 2 out of the 3 playoff games he has been a great upgrade over our bench players from last year, sadly now its our starters who have gone to crap.

    C.J. Watson: C-

    I tend to think he got burned on defense more tonight than normal even thought he had 3 steals. He did not do enough on the offensive end though to keep the Atlanta guards from being able to spend most of their energy on the offensive end themselves. However overall his was not nearly the worst performance of the night.

    Ian Mahinmi: B+

    Active and did stuff. If only he had an offensive game of any kind at all I would not worry about when he is on the floor, but alas passing the ball to him is like throwing it away for the most part. But his defense was great and he was active on the boards but the main thing is that he was active period.

    Evan Turner: D-

    Useless

    All we can do is try and regroup and do this again on Saturday but hopefully with a better end result.

    I’m all ears if someone wants to tell me how we are going to overcome our own weaknesses?


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

    When your the number one team playing a sub .500 eighth seed, you should take care of business regardless of the officiating. I did think we were on the verge of stealing the game before the non out of bounds call, but honestly, would anybody have felt that much better had we won? These playoffs were supposed to be about finally getting past the Heat. Even if we would have won, or even if we win the series the Pacers aren't magically going to start playing better the deeper they get on the playoffs. We didn't deserve to win. It's broke. It's so sad to watch.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

      Huh... Go back to the threads during the preseason and read what I wrote about us not having a chance without a real point guard. All I got was a bunch of idiots telling me we don't need a point guard. Yeah right :roll eyes: We've got two guys on this team that have any ball handling skills... Lance and CJ, that's it. Mediocre passers, poor ball handlers leading to turnovers. Ehhh, these guys are afraid to make a post entry pass, they just pass it around the perimeter and waste the clock then chuck up a shot with a hand in their face. I mean, come on... The pacers don't even really run basketball plays. To me it mostly comes down to not having a true pg.

      Oh well.... I already posted all the crap you guys are complaining about now back in October.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

        And something else... The next time I hear somebody talking about how "talented" this team is I'm gonna flip out because they aren't.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

          I will be so happy when this nightmare is over.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

            We have to match up with them. They are not very good. Vogel's insistence on formality and continuity has run it's course. Roy is nothing more than a scarecrow out there right now. Assuage his itty bitty feelings how ever you need to but play him very little.

            Hill want's no part of running the offense. It's time to take his word for it. He can play as needed as a three and D guy but I'd look at Cope or Butler instead unless the match ups insist on a guard.

            Sit anyone who doesn't commit themselves to team defense. Take it inside. No way they should be on the line more than us. It's got to be stupidly avoiding our advantage, laziness, or referee crookedness. Take your pick.

            We should still beat them but we must change our ways. We have been totally out coached so far. They are so dialed in on our weaknesses and we have proved it enough for me that we can not quickly enough fix those without a significant change in floor time for our personnel.

            I really like Coach V, but if he stands pat, he's a stooge.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

              Originally posted by Peck View Post

              In all honesty in the off season, if this goes how it looks like it is going to go, I fully expect Frank to be gone. I won’t like it but I won’t be able to really argue against it. On the other hand while I really like Birds take no prisoner attitude regarding wanting a title and I do believe he really tried to improve the team this year I will say this. I think I’m ready for him to go as well, just as long as he is not replaced by Walsh.

              The reason for my thinking this? Simply put I am tired of his disdain for point guards.

              Think about it for a min. In all of the years here, when was the last time Larry Bird drafted a point guard? When you think of one please let me know.

              I think this is just a bias he has from his days in Boston when they were simply built around their dynamic front court and they would just rotate guys in and out to play the point but none of them were ever really ball handling point guards. Tiny Archibald was probably the closest he ever had and he was already old when Bird got there.

              After watching us get trapped bringing the ball up the court for what seemed like the 100th time I was lamenting the entire slew of both superstar and well great point guards in the NBA today and we do not have a single one of them on our team.

              I like C.J. Watson and he is a great backup point guard, however that is what he is a backup point guard.

              Hill even says himself he is not a point guard and yes I know our offense doesn’t work with traditional point guards. Well I’m here to tell you our offense doesn’t work period, so next season I really truly want us to do almost anything in our power to bring in a point guard and I’m not talking another run of the mill backup quality point who we will run with the starters. When we have to bust some of this up and retool, which is what is going to have to happen if this does go down in flames like it is looking, then we need to be willing to look at trading some players who we didn’t think were tradable for a dynamic point guard.

              Great recap.

              I do disagree with wanting Bird gone though. Obviously he shares blame in what has gone on over the last couple of months, no doubt about that. Clearly trading Granger for Turner messed up some amount of chemistry in the locker room, and there's really no denying that after the Lance-Turner story. Bird overestimated that the locker room would be OK without Granger, and he overestimated Turner's ability to contribute to this team. However, if Bird left and was replaced by someone other than Walsh, it would be three different front offices in as many seasons. That's the epitome of unstable and I don't think it would do us any good.

              That being said, adding Watson and Scola were moves that made perfect sense at the time. Some think that in hindsight we paid too much for Scola, but I firmly believe that Green and Plumlee wouldn't have done anything here since most bench players die on the Pacers. Scola has shown over the last two games that he is exactly what we needed off of the bench. Unfortunately most of the team was crap last night.

              The main reason that we're failing is the starters. Yes Bird put them together, but there aren't many people out there who would have advocated making a change to that unit before the season started. It's not Bird's fault that Hibbert and Hill have turned into ghosts. Those guys used to be really good. Bird's moves gave a dead franchise a shot in the arm and returned us to relevancy. I think he's earned the right to see if he can fix this mess.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                I just am at a loss and in all of my years of watching a team I have never EVER seen anything like this happen.
                It has happened before right here in Indiana as a matter of fact.....

                2002-2003 the Indiana Pacers get off to a 14-2 start are 1st at the All-Star break have a record of 37-15.....and out of nowhere the team implodes.....they finish the year going 11-19 lose 12 of 13 games at one point during that stretch. Go from 1st in the East to 3rd play the Boston Celtics first round of the playoffs and proceed to lose in 6 games in the first round.......so this is not the first Pacer team to mysteriously implode unfortunately

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                  Originally posted by VideoVandal View Post
                  It has happened before right here in Indiana as a matter of fact.....

                  2002-2003 the Indiana Pacers get off to a 14-2 start are 1st at the All-Star break have a record of 37-15.....and out of nowhere the team implodes.....they finish the year going 11-19 lose 12 of 13 games at one point during that stretch. Go from 1st in the East to 3rd play the Boston Celtics first round of the playoffs and proceed to lose in 6 games in the first round.......so this is not the first Pacer team to mysteriously implode unfortunately
                  While I somewhat agree that was a team where Arrest, Tinsley, & others had a 1st taste of success. They & even J.O. had not seen the Semis & a game 7 of the ECF before. This team has & didn't come out of nowhere. This is far more turrible.

                  Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
                  1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                  3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                  5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                  7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.


                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                    Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                    I will be so happy when this nightmare is over.
                    imo this team is broken to a point that there is no fix unless players change. good luck doing that with these awful contracts. so i don't think the nightmare is over soon meaning this season.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                      Also as far as Hill. 500% agree!! I've been preaching it. PHX killed us by attacking him. Then Isaiah Thomas had over 40 against him the next game. Then they came home & PHX abused him again. He is & has ALWAYS been the weak link here. Teams saw how to attack him & our defense was never the same after those 3 games. The Pacers NEVER get enough assists & ALWAYS turn it over way too much. That just screams POINT GUARD!!! Now Hill got by because he scored a fair amount once upon a time & he wasn't completely exposed on defense as he is now. Every team attacks our defense the same way, go after Hill. It's like a quarterback abusing a matchup on a db. Last year Barkley kept saying in the ECF the Pacers can't win if Hill & Lance dont play well. When they did we won. That simple. Barkley is often wrong but he called that. Now Hibbert shooting 18% is bad but I thought to myself tonight, has he ever played without Hill on the floor in this slump? Probably not much.

                      We were probably already done last night late/mid 4th due to the hole we dug, but we had CJ & we were making a run. Then Vogel INEXPLICABLY brought back Hill who had done NOTHING to warrant playing & the ball just started sticking in an instant. The offense was done & what little chance we had DIED when George Hill came back to run the point. He's had 1 good half in 3 months & that was game 2 & he was playing the 2. Enough said.

                      Oh wait 1 last thing he sucks at defense. Carroll killed him, Teague killed him, & Korver killed him. He can not guard any player on the entire Hawks roster, period, case closed. Not 1! Maybe Lance wasn't much better defensively but he brought & brings some positive things like offense, a good pass every now & then, energy, etc. Obviously I'm watching sports on tv & listening on talk radio. The Pacers & Hibbert have just been getting PUMMELED. Maybe rightfully so, but the biggest culprit is the coach not Hibbert. Copeland has deserved a chance & George Hill should not play point again in this series. I gaurentee & I'm completely serious & I gaurentee that if we played Watson & Sloan at point this series we would be ahead 2-1. Hill has been that bad. He could & should be used as a 2 only. Lance & Paul cover up his total inability to run an offense. We are near the bottom of the league in offense & without PG's early season flame throwing start & Lance's fancy early season dimes we would be last. George Hill would & does run the worst offense in the NBA. He isn't the worst starter just the most out of his element. Have you ever said "damn, sick pass!" While watching Hill play point? No watch that ball stick & know it's over. A pass to him on the perimeter is an automatic 10 second dribble & right back to the guy that threw the pass.

                      Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
                      Last edited by larry; 04-25-2014, 07:44 AM.
                      1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                      3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                      5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                      7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.


                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                        I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere, but I'm also pointing a finger at PG for this. He was simply awful to start the game. No, he was worse than that. His play in the first 3 or 4 minutes told us everything we needed to know about the game and how it was going to go. How can someone come out so flat, so lazy, so un-engaged, so un-interested at the beginning of a game ?? Especially at this time of the year AND in this situation. Yeah - there's more than 1 problem with this team right now and yes, there's been more than 1 mistake made by the FO with players and their contracts - but PG sure did earn his fair share of the shitslinging last nite.

                        And they've committed to building the franchise around this guy ?? What I've seen in the last 3 months from him doesn't seem to make that look like a smart decision. This is the time he's supposed to be maturing and developing into a go-to guy. He appears to be going in the opposite direction.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                          There are some decent point guards later in the draft this year. PG and Lance are the two players who love to pound the rock like they are
                          On dancing with the stars. It is commpletely pointless and they should be put on the bench the next time they do it. Make the simple play please. PG had Teague guarding him when he made the pass to Hill which he preceeded to fumble away. PG just needed to back Teague in with one dribble and shoot a turnaround jumper.

                          As far as the next game start Scola and then Mahinmi or stick Allen in the starting lineup and keep all the other rotations the same.
                          Watson comes in very early for Hill. The play they ran for Copeland at the end of the half was a thing of beauty. Too bad it rimmed out.
                          They need Copeland out there. He is fearless and he can drive it effecttively also.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                            Originally posted by owl View Post
                            PG had Teague guarding him when he made the pass to Hill which he preceeded to fumble away. PG just needed to back Teague in with one dribble and shoot a turnaround jumper.
                            He may be a very good bball player, but he's certainly not the smartest or most observant one on the court. He does a lot of stupid ish. A LOT.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 3 Well crap....

                              I realize Dennis Johnson wasn't a natural point guard, but he did a pretty good impression of one imo....But yeah we could've had Jrue Holiday....
                              "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 template Next
                              Working...
                              X