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

Pacers/Magic postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    You have to read my posts more often so you don't make comments like this.

    I've said many times that I like DC but not as an starting point guard he is just not that good, he is to me the perfect second unit guy that you give a green light so he can score at will, I have also mentioned multiple times that I recognize that his value is high reason why I think that he could be a piece to actually bring an true starting point guard here, note that if I was thinking that he was garbage as many think here I wouldn't think that him with picks could net us a good player.
    I do read your posts. And I understand your points, really. I just disagree with them.

    DC is only 24. He can develop his game a lot and I sincerely believe that he can be our PG of the future.

    Getting a star point guard (because that's what you're asking in reality since you're not asking for the likes of Nash or Felton) could make us better but it could also ruin our chemistry (let alone that it could potentially deplete our core).

    I will agree that court vision is not DC's strongest point. But he can improve it. Working alongside a PG that can run the pick will do miracles for him. Court vision can be improved. Getting Dragic to be our backup PG would heavily benefit DC and wouldn't deplete our core.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      I do read your posts. And I understand your points, really. I just disagree with them.

      DC is only 24. He can develop his game a lot and I sincerely believe that he can be our PG of the future.

      Getting a star point guard (because that's what you're asking in reality since you're not asking for the likes of Nash or Felton) could make us better but it could also ruin our chemistry (let alone that it could potentially deplete our core).

      I will agree that court vision is not DC's strongest point. But he can improve it. Working alongside a PG that can run the pick will do miracles for him. Court vision can be improved. Getting Dragic to be our backup PG would heavily benefit DC and wouldn't deplete our core.
      I've been asking for Nash or Felton for years and yes I agree that he is young and all that but like I've say like a thousand times floor vision and passing ability to me is a thing you are born with and DC doesn't have that, he is pretty like TJ Ford before everybody realized that he was not a true point guard, 3 teams were fooled by TJ thinking that he was the answer I could see the same thing happening here.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        I've been asking for Nash or Felton for years and yes I agree that he is young and all that but like I've say like a thousand times floor vision and passing ability to me is a thing you are born with and DC doesn't have that, he is pretty like TJ Ford before everybody realized that he was not a true point guard, 3 teams were fooled by TJ thinking that he was the answer I could see the same thing happening here.
        Well, I'm only reading PD this year and I haven't see you being particular positive about Nash or Felton. It could be my mistake, I guess.

        Passing ability can be learned. Running a pick and roll can be learned. I see it constantly in Europe. Young PGs just learn how to run a pick and roll and split defenses by PGs who have more experience in the league. That's why you see that PGs who come to the NBA from Europe (even by being born there like Dragic, Udrih, Calderon or Beaubois or by playing there like Jennings) can run the offense better than other PGs of their talent level. Because they learned how to do it.

        PS: The comparison you made with TJ Ford just reinforced my opinion that you are biased about DC.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          Well, I'm only reading PD this year and I haven't see you being particular positive about Nash or Felton. It could be my mistake, I guess.

          Passing ability can be learned. Running a pick and roll can be learned. I see it constantly in Europe. Young PGs just learn how to run a pick and roll and split defenses by PGs who have more experience in the league. That's why you see that PGs who come to the NBA from Europe (even by being born there like Dragic, Udrih, Calderon or Beaubois or by playing there like Jennings) can run the offense better than other PGs of their talent level. Because they learned how to do it.

          PS: The comparison you made with TJ Ford just reinforced my opinion that you are biased about DC.
          Given their size, poor court vision/passing ability, and mid-range game, i can see the DC/tJ Ford comparison. Everyone wants to say he's "young" well so are D.rose, Westbrook, Lawson, Holliday, and the list goes on. DC is an avg PG at best.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            Given their size, poor court vision/passing ability, and mid-range game, i can see the DC/tJ Ford comparison. Everyone wants to say he's "young" well so are D.rose, Westbrook, Lawson, Holliday, and the list goes on. DC is an avg PG at best.
            You're right that D.Rose, Westbrook, Lawson and Holiday are young. But they also are score first point guards.

            DC is showing signs that he wants to evolve to a pass first point guard. And he has the tools for it. He has good handles. His low center of gravity and his quickness help him to blow by his defender and score with a quick layup if he fakes a shoulder showing that he is gonna pass to a big. He has a great mid range shot so the defenders cannot get under the pick.

            What does he lack? The knowledge to run a pick and split the defense and the passing ability. Both can be learned just by having a pure pass first point guard to play alongside him.

            PS: The great thing of starting to watch the NBA and the Pacers this year is that I am not prejudiced about any player. I didn't know how Danny, DC or Hibbert played last year. I only know how they've played so far. So, I only judge them based on this year's performance.

            Danny could be a choker last year, DC could be horrible and Hibbert could be soft. Is this how they've been this year? No.

            Still, a lot of people complain about Danny being a choker, some people also say that DC has been horrible and some people even said that Hibbert is still soft. These statements are not even logical if you look at this year's play. They are opinions of people who are predisposed against certain players due to the performances they had in previous seasons. This season is not the previous season, however.

            So, those people could probably be better off if they judged our players based on this season.

            That's why while I do see the points in the DC/TJ Ford comparison I consider it nothing more than a bias.

            Then again, I could be biased as well if I watched the NBA during the JOB years
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

              I've been holding back from posting for a while. This year is so exciting. We have a team that is built to win a 7 games series against any team. How sweet would it be if we stole the championship this year? Man don't get me started but Indianapolis really needs to get behind this team. We really need our best showing of the year against Orlando this weekend. The house needs to be packed and rowdy pro-Pacers. Maybe we could steal some east coast fans that support more than one team, or hell even some bandwagoners. I don't mind a heavy bandwagon ever. Bandwagons mean people think you have a chance to win it all.

              All I know is we better protect our home court better than we did against them last time. That game was embarassing because as much as many of us have hated on Stan for his comments, he demolished us with JOB spread the court philosipy and hit what 13 3s on us? I hope we play them like we did tonight before the Super Bowl. We need to send the message out we are legit!

              On a side note I do feel kind of bad for Stan, but just a tad. It's hard to feel bad for a rich guy who coached a team that destroyed our team for years running until now. I think he realized his comments were way off base after tonight. Orlando tied his hands by making bad FO moves with the maybe the best center in the game.

              I say maybe the best because Quinn was spot on tonight when he said it is hard to win playoff games with a guy like Howard. The dude really is a liability on the offensive end. Sure he can put 30 on dunks and put backs all day, but he isn't unstoppable like Shaq Daddy was. You can play Dwight very physical and really limit his offense by sending him to the foul line. He also has 0 mid range game, maybe the worst out of a starting center in the league. Still his defense, rebounding, strength and dunk game make him the best center in the game. Though Hibbert is playing a lot closer to his level when you consider Hibbert is light years ahead of Howard shooting the ball. I just look at Dwight's scoring threat as a liability but I don't know why. He averages a lot of points to prove me wrong. He gives you nothing outside of 5 feet and I think that is the reason Orlando has never went anywhere. Plus this new CBA is going to make it hard for any team with star players already to sign him. Welcome to the new NBA boys. I kind of enjoy it.

              And to give credit where it is due, I thought Crawford and Bavetta gave us a fair game tonight. One of the best officiating jobs I've seen in a while actually, which is what really surprised me. I felt like they gave neither team an advantage late in the game, and it isn't just because we won. The Sacramento game in the 4th? They might as well have had the Kings' colors on. Though we were up big going into the 4th and I felt that maybe they were just trying to make the thing interesting because the Kings were clearly out hustling us and wanted it more that night. We were terrible shooting the ball and got utterly destroyed on the boards and inevitably, that is why we lost that one. Regardless of the calls in the 4th we still should have won that one, and the loss was all on us. Tonight I don't feel like they were giving the Magic the calls, nor the Pacers. It just seemed more balanced to me so kudos to them.
              Last edited by Midcoasted; 01-30-2012, 04:47 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                Given their size, poor court vision/passing ability, and mid-range game, i can see the DC/tJ Ford comparison. Everyone wants to say he's "young" well so are D.rose, Westbrook, Lawson, Holliday, and the list goes on. DC is an avg PG at best.
                I don't like your argument. What you said is true, but then all players don't grow at the same rate, plus this is DC's 2nd team and what . . . third different coach?

                Whatever, he's obviously getting better now! For how many years have we needed a guard that could stay in front of their man and stop dribble penetration? Ford couldn't do it with all his speed, but DC is for the most part doing it.

                Of course DC is getting help from his team mates whereas Ford had a young Hibbert and Troy Murphy to help him.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                  Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                  6'8.75" (no shoes), 7'1" wingspan, 8'11" standing reach ... funny enough, nearly identical to McRoberts.

                  http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...dergraph-1165/

                  THANX!!!

                  Being 6'10" in shoes, tells me my eyes were correct when seeing him looking taller than Granger.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                    And to give credit where it is due, I thought Crawford and Bavetta gave us a fair game tonight.
                    Agreed.

                    Less credentialed officials may have been more willing to give calls to the superstar. There were several calls last night that ticked Howard off, ones he usually gets, I'm guessing.

                    Bavetta and Crawford? Honey Badger don't care!
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      DC is only 24. He can develop his game a lot and I sincerely believe that he can be our PG of the future.
                      This nicely sums up the debate, when you get past all the screaming.

                      I disagree with your premise. But I don't think it's a crazy one.

                      I am of the opinion that court vision is more innate than learned. I think Collison can be very good at times, but see him as a backup. I really want our next big move to be for an excellent pass first point guard.

                      Nonetheless, Collison has impressed the heck out of me this year.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                        Getting Dragic to be our backup PG would heavily benefit DC and wouldn't deplete our core.

                        He's a 2 mil expiring. If he can't be gotten thru a trade this season, sign him this off season. Especially if Hill isn't re-signed.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          I am of the opinion that court vision is more innate than learned.
                          Court vision is innate. Passing ability and the knowledge to run an offense are not innate. It is good to have the whole package but you can run an offense very effectively having the two non-innate ones and a little bit of the innate one.

                          Guys like Steve Nash, Arvydas Sabonis and Sarunas Jasikevicius possess amazing court vision but we don't necessarily need that (not that it would be bad of course). Guys like Goran Dragic and Beno Udrih do not possess amazing court vision. They possess adequate court vision and they have good passing skills and amazing know-how to run an offense.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                            I've been critical of Collision at times, but using an Anthem post to look at teams PG's, who is really available that the Pacers can get to replace Collision? You can talk about Nash & Williams, but they aren't coming here. Wall, Knight, and Irving aren't going to be traded either. That puts DC about as good as there is. You want a better/different PG, then the answer looks to me that PG has to be drafted. Keep in mind that it will take TIME for him to learn to play in the NBA where as DC is tested under fire. There will be a learning curve for a rookie PG too.

                            Collision is starting his 3rd season under his 4th coach, so it's not been the easiest way of learning. As with others, I at times get frustrated, but I can see improvement in DC's game this year, especially his "D". People were extremely critical of his lack of "D" last year, and he worked on improving it. I can see him working on improving other aspects of his game in the future too.... just don't expect it all at once. It may take some time as pointed out about Nash and Billups games involing... hopefully not that long. Babies don't come already walking, talking, and potty trained when born, don't we all wish they did/had, so maybe some need to cut DC some slack while he grows. I'm going to try, others might want to as well. Rome wasn't built in a day and most PG's aren't either. It's a growth process.
                            Last edited by Justin Tyme; 01-30-2012, 07:54 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                              George Hill was the story of that game. Just a brilliant effort on both ends of the court. Both Collison and Hill embarrassed Duhon out there. Sure, their starter was out, but if we can get point guard play like that consistently, this team will be tough to beat.

                              Getting that kind of win, while Hibbert has maybe his worst game of the season, is a great sign.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Magic postgame thread

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                You mean taking things out of context like you guys are doing right now? Hicks is bringing up and idea and all the DC protectors jump out of their holes to tell Hicks how wrong he is and how he dares to call DC a shooting guard? I was just an idea and you guys are just too sensitive to even think about it.
                                I don't think you understand what taking something out of context means, honestly because all you're saying is that disagreeing with Hicks means that's what we're doing. Besides that nobody is 'jumping out of their hole', it's just mentioning that we don't agree. Nobody said anything along the lines of 'how dare you!!' If anyone is sensitive it's obviously you, by feeling like there's a problem because we don't all agree with your assessment.

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                So Collison is holding opposite players to 42% and the average player in the NBA is shooting all times low around 42/43% I think? I don't think you can trust those numbers.
                                Actually the league average shooting is over 44%.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X