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

Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

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

  • #76
    Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

    I see no reason to alter the positive part of the team that made the team accomplishment of taking Miami 7 games. The starting lineup was not broken and the bench was. So let's not fix what isn't broken...
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

      Originally posted by Mr.ThunderMakeR View Post
      I think Lance's playmaking abilities are being overestimated here. He can run the fast break like noone on our team and he can break his man down off that dribble. That is about it,
      You think? Have you not seen some of the sweet entry passes Lance has made to West, for example? Lance is just 22 and is going to get even better. Danny's already peaked and will never again play that well. These are the facts. In 12 months, Danny Granger will have a different mailing address.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        In 12 months, Danny Granger will have a different mailing address.
        Probably but we're trying to win a championship now! Who helps the most at the moment? That's the whole point of the debate, imo.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          I see no reason to alter the positive part of the team that made the team accomplishment of taking Miami 7 games. The starting lineup was not broken and the bench was. So let's not fix what isn't broken...
          It wasn't broken with Danny in the line-up either. So again stupid argument. Bring something of substance and logic to the discussion please.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
            Probably but we're trying to win a championship now! Who helps the most at the moment? That's the whole point of the debate, imo.
            Both will help us. The question is whether you want a consistent starting lineup with a potentially great backup who will end up playing big minutes...or you want to roll the dice with your starting lineup.

            Edit: What happens if it's March and Granger has issues with scar tissue again? That would make a fine mess.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              It wasn't broken with Danny in the line-up either. So again stupid argument. Bring something of substance and logic to the discussion please.
              That was when Granger was healthy. He's yet to prove it. In fact, if anything he's shown he can't stay on the floor. We know the starting unit with Lance was good enough to win it all. A bird in the hand my friend. You want to risk that by wheeling out a guy with a questionable knee?

              A guy who can't even stay on the floor. A guy who has injured his back and calf compensating for a knee he's not relying on. If Granger isn't operating on all cylinders, he shouldn't be in the starting lineup. Let him play lots and lots of minutes. I'm fine with that. But if we cannot rely on him staying on the floor he shouldn't be starting...risking home court advantage. If we don't allow the starting unit to gel because he's can't stay healthy...or worse if he goes down like he did last year...
              Last edited by BlueNGold; 10-22-2013, 09:01 PM.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                That was when Granger was healthy. He's yet to prove it. In fact, if anything he's shown he can't stay on the floor. We know the starting unit with Lance was good enough to win it all. A bird in the hand my friend. You want to risk that by wheeling out a guy with a questionable knee?

                A guy who can't even stay on the floor. A guy who has injured his back and calf compensating for a knee he's not relying on. If Granger isn't operating on all cylinders, he shouldn't be in the starting lineup. Let him play lots and lots of minutes. I'm fine with that. But if we cannot rely on him staying on the floor he shouldn't be starting...risking home court advantage. If we don't allow the starting unit to gel because he's can't stay healthy...or worse if he goes down like he did last year...
                So are you saying that last years starting 5 didn't have good chemistry, and that group needs to play together in order to build chemistry in case Granger has an injury? But you aren't worried about if Lance has an injury, and Granger steps in for him?

                If everyone accepts that last years squad had great chemistry, which I have yet to see someone say they didn't, then there is no need to worry about that unit gelling together.

                Anyone can tweak their back on an illegal screen, he wasn't compensating for anything. A strained muscle may have something to do with compensating, but much more likely it is just because of the time off. Neither are anything worth worrying about. Most players have such injuries during the course of an NBA season, it is about as worrisome as a jammed finger.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  Pros for DJ/Hans over CJ/Scola
                  2012-13 ECF 7 Game Series

                  Cons for CJ/Scola over DJ/Hans
                  2012-13 ECF 7 Game Series

                  See how stupid that argument is? Don't place team accomplishments to individuals who were just along for the ride. The difference between 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 was George, Hibbert, and playing the Heat in the ECF instead of semi-finals.
                  C'mon man, that's just weak. I notice it's the same folks who never believed in Lance in the first place that keep saying he wasn't an integral part of our team last year. IMO Paul was able to spread his wings BECAUASE of the Lance/Granger swap. What makes you think Paul becomes the player he has if Granger's still in the line-up taking up a quarter of the posessions?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    So are you saying that last years starting 5 didn't have good chemistry, and that group needs to play together in order to build chemistry in case Granger has an injury? But you aren't worried about if Lance has an injury, and Granger steps in for him?

                    If everyone accepts that last years squad had great chemistry, which I have yet to see someone say they didn't, then there is no need to worry about that unit gelling together.

                    Anyone can tweak their back on an illegal screen, he wasn't compensating for anything. A strained muscle may have something to do with compensating, but much more likely it is just because of the time off. Neither are anything worth worrying about. Most players have such injuries during the course of an NBA season, it is about as worrisome as a jammed finger.
                    He doesn't trust his knee yet. That's why it's happening IMPO. We'll see how it goes.

                    What I do not want to see is either of two things.

                    1) Danny start but go in and out of the starting lineup wasting precious time...losing games and home court...then ultimately Lance starting later in the season because it becomes clear that Danny cannot be relied upon. Sure, Lance has experience with the starters but more experience is going to help a young player.

                    2) Danny start and have issues with scar tissue later in the season. His issue is basically "jumper's knee" from over-use. The tendon had scar tissue and they cut it off the tendon. The tendon will never be the same and a recurrence is a risk. I think it's a big risk for a professional athlete playing an 82 game season. If he starts and goes down in February or March due to more scar tissue, it will stink but it will stink more if he had been the starter all year.

                    This all comes down to expectations and risk tolerance. We are all Pacer fans. I think we all like Danny and Lance. I don't want to risk it because I know you only have so many shots at a ring. We had the best starting lineup in the NBA just last season. Why risk changing that? It's debatable that Granger in his current state is as good as Lance considering all facets of the game. Why not give Danny all the minutes he can handle and have him come off the bench? Very low risk and it's all gravy with a much, much better bench.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                      Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                      C'mon man, that's just weak. I notice it's the same folks who never believed in Lance in the first place that keep saying he wasn't an integral part of our team last year. IMO Paul was able to spread his wings BECAUASE of the Lance/Granger swap. What makes you think Paul becomes the player he has if Granger's still in the line-up taking up a quarter of the posessions?
                      FWIW, I was NOT a Lance Stephenson fan on draft day or the first year. But I changed my tune after seeing his game. I'm a Bird/fundamentals fan far more than the And-One stuff. The fact is, Lance has some of the gifts that make players like LeBron and Magic the best in history. Whether he fully makes use of them effectively is a real question...but even if he doesn't he is still very solid and getting better.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                        It's amazing for me to see the so call Danny fans wanting him to play starter minutes and pretty much run him to the ground before the playoffs, even in pre-season some posters were super happy that he was pilling up all those minutes after not playing for a long time, now he got injured because Danny himself, the Pacers and somewhat the so called fans were not able to control themself and instead of bringing him up slowly they decided for some reason that he needed to be ready for the first game of the season, stupid decision on everybody's part if you ask me.


                        Now lets hope that this "fans" don't get burned for wanting a guy with a bad knee to play 30+ minutes a game because they have a mancrush on him, lets hope the Pacers are smarter this time.
                        Last edited by vnzla81; 10-22-2013, 10:20 PM.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          You think? Have you not seen some of the sweet entry passes Lance has made to West, for example? Lance is just 22 and is going to get even better. Danny's already peaked and will never again play that well. These are the facts. In 12 months, Danny Granger will have a different mailing address.
                          Lance's passing is inconsistent. One game, I'm walking to my car thinking back in awe of the 4-5 passes that Lance completed during the game that no one else on our team would dream of attempting. The next game, I'm walking to my car pissed off at Lance for attempting 4-5 difficult passes that didn't work out. Most games, it is half and half, meaning that some passes work out and others do not.

                          Considering his youth and relative inexperience, this is not altogether a bad thing. He has the confidence to attempt the passes in the first place and he makes himself very unpredictable for his opponents. But, the fundamentalist in me really wishes that he would dial it back a notch or two and just learn to play within himself. More under control and making appropriate decisions that would lead to fewer turnovers.

                          If we contrasted Danny to Lance in this regard, obviously Danny is limited in his ability to create. For the most part, Danny creates for others only by being a shooting threat, commanding defenders to close space to contend shots and dishing off. Danny usually does not commit turnovers while passing to others because he hardly ever attempts a difficult pass. His turnovers come mostly from ball handling miscues in traffic. We could say that with regards to passing, Danny plays within himself because he doesn't attempt what he is not able to do.

                          To determine which player should be on the court at any given moment, I think it should be determined by what is needed by the players on the floor. If Danny is on the floor and his shooting is not opening up greater opportunities for getting he ball into West and Hibbert, then we should switch to Lance and let him drive the ball. If Lance is not contributing offensively and we can't get the ball in to West and Hibbert, then we bring in Danny to see if his shooting can help open things up.

                          The approach to the game by these two players is different. It really does give us a lot of versatility. We have the best of both worlds. It really doesn't matter anymore which player starts, although I've always had a greater fondness for Granger. The only thing that I want to see is Vogel being quick to swap one out for the other in order to provide what is needed by the offense at any moment.
                          Last edited by beast23; 10-22-2013, 10:07 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            He doesn't trust his knee yet. That's why it's happening IMPO. We'll see how it goes.

                            What I do not want to see is either of two things.

                            1) Danny start but go in and out of the starting lineup wasting precious time...losing games and home court...then ultimately Lance starting later in the season because it becomes clear that Danny cannot be relied upon. Sure, Lance has experience with the starters but more experience is going to help a young player.

                            2) Danny start and have issues with scar tissue later in the season. His issue is basically "jumper's knee" from over-use. The tendon had scar tissue and they cut it off the tendon. The tendon will never be the same and a recurrence is a risk. I think it's a big risk for a professional athlete playing an 82 game season. If he starts and goes down in February or March due to more scar tissue, it will stink but it will stink more if he had been the starter all year.

                            This all comes down to expectations and risk tolerance. We are all Pacer fans. I think we all like Danny and Lance. I don't want to risk it because I know you only have so many shots at a ring. We had the best starting lineup in the NBA just last season. Why risk changing that? It's debatable that Granger in his current state is as good as Lance considering all facets of the game. Why not give Danny all the minutes he can handle and have him come off the bench? Very low risk and it's all gravy with a much, much better bench.
                            Since he is going to be playing the same amount of minutes whether or not he starts, we will have to replace the same amount of minutes either way. There are only 3 players (Copeland, CJ, Scola) likely to see rotation minutes on our roster that don't have experience in Vogel's system. These guys will all be able to play with each other by the end of the year well, man 1 through man 12. If Granger is the better overall player, and there's a lot of evidence that indicate that he still is, then you start him.

                            I just don't see the risk aversion angle. If you believe Stephenson is better, that should be your argument. Because otherwise you're ceding that Granger is the better fit, but you're willing to handicap your team's potential because something bad *might* happen.

                            The Pacers aren't a bunch of hormonal 14 year old girls, they're grown men. I would like to think that they would be able to adapt to any one of the 5 spots going out for injury. Conversely, every member of the bench should be ready for extended minutes.
                            Time for a new sig.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                              C'mon man, that's just weak. I notice it's the same folks who never believed in Lance in the first place that keep saying he wasn't an integral part of our team last year. IMO Paul was able to spread his wings BECAUASE of the Lance/Granger swap. What makes you think Paul becomes the player he has if Granger's still in the line-up taking up a quarter of the posessions?
                              I was actually much higher on Lance last year than most were and was arguing for people to not give up on him. And I don't know what you mean by "integral" part of the team, but he was easily the fifth most important starter on our team and pretty much gave us a very average player's production at the spot. He did rebound extremely well in the playoffs against three small ball teams and changed the dynamic of a few games, but so did all of the other starters. He also lost efficiency dramatically as his USG rate increased.
                              Time for a new sig.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                Edit: What happens if it's March and Granger has issues with scar tissue again? That would make a fine mess.
                                Wait a minute. I presume you mean that, in he event that Granger is the starter, Granger experiencing issues with scar tissue in March will make for a fine mess for our starting line up?

                                If this is correct, are you serious? In that event, our starting lineup moves on, the same as it did last year, with Lance inserted in as the SG.

                                The only "fine mess" that is created would be the same problem that we would have if any of our rotational players were injured. And that problem would be that our depth is suddenly decreased by a player. In fact, if Granger or Lance either one were injured, I would say that the negative affect on the performance of the team would be much less than if one of the other four starters became injured. Lance and Granger can fill in suitably for one another, as can West and Scola (I'm hoping, anyway). If we are lucky, Watson will eventually be able to provide the same redundancy for GHill.

                                Now if one of George or Hibbert is injured, then hell yes we are in a pickle. Or "fine mess" as you put it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X