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

Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

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

  • #76
    Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

    Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
    This subject has been beaten into the ground so many times.

    Fundamentals are NOT lacking any more in the NBA than in the NCAA. Look at FT% of pro players vs. NCAA. I'm trying to find the article that read the "NCAA players are better at fundamentals" myth the riot act, so give me some time.

    They are not better at the game. Never have been, never will be.

    There are many out there that consider the NBA age rule nothing more than indentured servitude. But I'll admit that it is not nearly as bad as the NFL/NCAA Football system.

    What does NCAA ball have over the pros? The game environment is much more fun for spectators. I prefer NCAA cheerleeding teams over NBA strippers - I mean - "dancers". They play live music instead of DJ bull****. They don't need an MC. They don't need silly contests or annoying sound affects. They don't play stupid sound affects during game play.

    NBA franchises everywhere need to try and figure out why they have a less enjoyable experience yet typically charge more money.

    I would prefer everything the NCAA does off the court, but the gameplay at the NBA level is a zillion times (to be scientific ) superior.

    Off to find the stat book ...

    That is an excellent post, and I agree 110% (just for you Shade)

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      Team work=fundamentals. The NBA is hardly the poster child for teamwork.

      Also, you can have horrible shooting fundamentals, and still hit a FT. No, I'm not trying to say that college players are better shooters fundamentally, but what I am saying is that statistics can't be used to show which level is fundamentally better.

      You can offer ft%, shooting%, TOs, assists, any stat you want and it won't change my opinion.

      Please show me where I said they were better at the game? You'll fail to find it. I would much rather watch college players, because they play the game in a manner in which it should be played. I get tired of watching all the Starbury's and Tinsley's do their Rucker Park act. It just makes me want to get sick.

      That's all I'm going to say on the subject.
      Well, I just don't know how you can claim that NCAA teams play better as teams.

      Even the legendary offenses of Indiana, Duke, UCLA, UConn and Kentucky had individuals who could take over a game.

      Basketball is a combination of teamwork and individual excellence at all levels. The myth that teamwork does not exist in the NBA was created by the marketing of individuals like Jordan and Magic.

      The fact that Peyton Manning scores more points and gets more face time in the press does not make people think that the colts do not play as a team. But if an NBA star is in the spotlight he's instantly branded as selfish. I don't think that's fair to the sport.

      Just my opinion also.
      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

        OK - I'm 80% sure that the passage I'm looking for was either written by John Feinstein in the book "Let Me Tell You a Story" or by L. Jon Wertheim in the book "Transition Game - How Hoosiers Went Hip-Hop".

        It was called "old white guy syndrome" and it showed how - beyond a shadow of a doubt - that both the attitude that the NBA was better in the "old days" and the attitude that NCAA bball is a more "pure" form of the sport compared to NBA ball are not founded in truth.

        The other 20% of me thinks I read the article online, perhaps in ESPN Insider.
        “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

        “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

          Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
          Just look at the Pacers last few top 15 picks...
          okay lets... i'll focus on players back to dale davis that gives us about 15 years to examine

          Fred Jones (#15): Still in the league. The only two notable people he was picked in front of were Tayshaun Prince (#23) and Carlos Boozer (#35) but Boozer was essentially passed over by most. Other than missing the boat on those two, I'm not sure how Fred was a terrible choice. The Cavs selected Dajuan Wagner 30 picks ahead of Boozer so everybody missed the boat on Boozer. anyway he is still playing so he wasn't terrible and we never overpaid him.

          Austin Croshere (#12): who that is still playing in the league would you rather have? stephen jackson? anthony johnson? kelvin cato? anderson? this pick makes perfect sense. and despite the massive contract (which you can't blame on him, he earned a contract extension and a raise, blame TPTB for the amount of the raise) how has croshere been a bust?

          Erick Dampier (#10): This was probably a bad draft pick, although he's still a starter in the league. What was bad about it was that we didn't hang on to him, had we kept him it might not be so bad. We missed Kobe, Nash, Peja and Jermaine in the 1st round. JO didn't blossom until he got to the Pacers, Peja would have been a better draft choice because at the time we had MJax, Workman, Hoiberg... we already had Reggie, Rose and McKey around the SF and SG spots...

          Eric Piatkowski (#18): does he count since we traded him away and didn't play for indiana? if so, he is still in the league and while he's not playing in phoenix (lets face it no one besides the top 7 play any significant minutes) he's had a decent career.

          Scott Haskin (#14): a genuine bust.

          Malik Sealy (#10): probably would still be playing today.

          Dale Davis (#13): is this considered a bust? i would hope not.

          There was a time when the Pacers selected well with high draft picks. The trend shows they've not done so well as of late.
          just because we haven't drafted a genuine superstar doesn't mean this team hasn't drafted well. you have to look at the needs of the team and the players taken later. gilbert arenas was selected in the 2nd round so was boozer, just because hindsight helps now doesn't mean they were even close to obvious choices on draft night.
          This is the darkest timeline.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

            We should've kept certain players that we moved this past year. We needed to get rid of Jack and Artest, and probably Tins. One accomplishment; we gpt rid of RonRon but recieved nothing, nothing really. Second, we got rid of Jack, I liked Jack but it was his choice to get in off-court troubles. We shouldn't have let go of Freddy. He provides energy that could get us going, and the fans pumped after a monster dunk. I'm not really surprised that we are having such a bad year, I expect big changes during off-season and I can't wait to start on a new slate, hopefully.
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMltKsoDwe8&NR=1
            press pause on the second slow-mo replay around 0:12 mark

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

              Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
              OK - I'm 80% sure that the passage I'm looking for was either written by John Feinstein in the book "Let Me Tell You a Story" or by L. Jon Wertheim in the book "Transition Game - How Hoosiers Went Hip-Hop".

              It was called "old white guy syndrome" and it showed how - beyond a shadow of a doubt - that both the attitude that the NBA was better in the "old days" and the attitude that NCAA bball is a more "pure" form of the sport compared to NBA ball are not founded in truth.

              The other 20% of me thinks I read the article online, perhaps in ESPN Insider.
              Well considering that I'm only 20years old, I doubt I fall into the category of an "old white guy."

              I just don't know how you can say that the NBA isn't a "me" first league when you have players tell management it's either a teammate or them, especially when the duo has already been to 3NBA finals, winning two of them. Yes, I'm talking about Kobe Bryant.

              JO complained about the new style of offense after 8games, and it went back to just dumping it to him into the low post.

              This also a time where ESPN runs a show called "street ball" where the whole thing is designed to make your opponent look stupid by throwing the ball of the defenders forehead.

              In my opinion, high school and college basketball hasn't been touched quite as heavily as the NBA as a "me first" game.

              BTW, I wasn't old enough to have MJ and Magic shoved down my throat either.

              EDIT: How many times on this board have we discussed the reasons why the Pacers have a similiar record with JO injured than when he's playing? It's always because we go away from the "JO offense" and play as a team. The league is filled with a whole bunch of iso plays, whether they're for post players or for perimeter, it really doesn't matter.

              Obviously the NBA is the best in terms of the level of basketball being played. I'm not even coming close to arguing that. Individually, it's the greatest league in the world, with the best players in the world. I would just rather watch a game that was bigger than the "stars," and I think the college game is the best place for it.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                There have been so many examples of selfish a-holes in college and HS sports. Sure, the NBA has some, but they are just the most famous ones.

                How many NCAA kids transfer schools? How many kids hog the ball? How many end up in public disputes with thier coach? How many try to jump to the NBA at the first opportunity?

                I'm glad you brough up Shaq and Kobe, because one thing is for sure, they played well together on the court, they were great compliments and those Laker teams did in fact play a pretty well-rounded team game.

                I want to hear how college teams as a whole play with more teamwork on the court than NBA teams. Try and prove it without bringing up off the court stuff as evidence.

                Fact is, the NCAA game is a SLOWER game, so it's easier for fans to follow the plays. That makes fans think that they are seeing more plays and more teamwork. The shot clock is 35 seconds, allowing for more passes. There is a 5 second rule so there is less isolation play.

                In the NBA, you can't pass the ball 12 times when you only get roughly 20 seconds to find a weakness in the defense and exploit it. sometimes the weakness appears 4 seconds in and WHAM the ball is in the hole and the play is over. That doesn't mean there was no teamwork, in fact it often means there was great teamwork but lazy fans aren't quick enough to see it.
                “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                  I find the ego-maniac coaches in the semi-pro (Division I, major conferene) (thanks Mark) game make it utterly unwatchable.

                  If I want to watch basketball, its because I want to watch the players play, not watch some guy in a suit who isn't even involved interject himself into the action. I'll go watch the conductor at a symphony do that before I'll purposely sit through a game at the semi-pro level with inferior players and overrated coaches.

                  If you want to blame the NBA and its drafting of younger and younger players for the decline of the NCAA, so be it. I won't argue that point. But semi-pro (ie, Division I) basketball is a very poor example of teamwork, fundamentals, whatever. Division I college basketball is just as corrupt with lazy, me-first players as the NBA. They're generally only playing for NBA draft options, not the team. And they're not student-athletes, unless they're playing at Texas Tech.

                  If you want to watch the things Since86 talks about, go watch a Division III team. In real life, I've been getting to know the guy that coaches the Division III team here in my western suburb of Chicago. Maybe if I swear off the Pacers/ NBA altogether I'll get into the habit of following his team.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                    Have they unraveled yet?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                      Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                      okay lets... i'll focus on players back to dale davis that gives us about 15 years to examine

                      Fred Jones (#15): Still in the league. The only two notable people he was picked in front of were Tayshaun Prince (#23) and Carlos Boozer (#35) but Boozer was essentially passed over by most. Other than missing the boat on those two, I'm not sure how Fred was a terrible choice. The Cavs selected Dajuan Wagner 30 picks ahead of Boozer so everybody missed the boat on Boozer. anyway he is still playing so he wasn't terrible and we never overpaid him.

                      Austin Croshere (#12): who that is still playing in the league would you rather have? stephen jackson? anthony johnson? kelvin cato? anderson? this pick makes perfect sense. and despite the massive contract (which you can't blame on him, he earned a contract extension and a raise, blame TPTB for the amount of the raise) how has croshere been a bust?

                      Erick Dampier (#10): This was probably a bad draft pick, although he's still a starter in the league. What was bad about it was that we didn't hang on to him, had we kept him it might not be so bad. We missed Kobe, Nash, Peja and Jermaine in the 1st round. JO didn't blossom until he got to the Pacers, Peja would have been a better draft choice because at the time we had MJax, Workman, Hoiberg... we already had Reggie, Rose and McKey around the SF and SG spots...

                      Eric Piatkowski (#18): does he count since we traded him away and didn't play for indiana? if so, he is still in the league and while he's not playing in phoenix (lets face it no one besides the top 7 play any significant minutes) he's had a decent career.

                      Scott Haskin (#14): a genuine bust.

                      Malik Sealy (#10): probably would still be playing today.

                      Dale Davis (#13): is this considered a bust? i would hope not.



                      just because we haven't drafted a genuine superstar doesn't mean this team hasn't drafted well. you have to look at the needs of the team and the players taken later. gilbert arenas was selected in the 2nd round so was boozer, just because hindsight helps now doesn't mean they were even close to obvious choices on draft night.
                      I think you missed my point. The Pacers haven't selected a guy in the top 15 since Reggie Miller that ended up being a real difference maker. I'm not saying some of those guys haven't been decent ball players just not the second coming. A top 15 draft pick doesn't mean anything is all I'm saying, none of those guys you critiqued would make a difference on this team. Even in their primes.....
                      I'm in these bands
                      The Humans
                      Dr. Goldfoot
                      The Bar Brawlers
                      ME

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                        Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                        This subject has been beaten into the ground so many times.

                        Fundamentals are NOT lacking any more in the NBA than in the NCAA. Look at FT% of pro players vs. NCAA. I'm trying to find the article that read the "NCAA players are better at fundamentals" myth the riot act, so give me some time.

                        They are not better at the game. Never have been, never will be.

                        There are many out there that consider the NBA age rule nothing more than indentured servitude. But I'll admit that it is not nearly as bad as the NFL/NCAA Football system.

                        What does NCAA ball have over the pros? The game environment is much more fun for spectators. I prefer NCAA cheerleeding teams over NBA strippers - I mean - "dancers". They play live music instead of DJ bull****. They don't need an MC. They don't need silly contests or annoying sound affects. They don't play stupid sound affects during game play.

                        NBA franchises everywhere need to try and figure out why they have a less enjoyable experience yet typically charge more money.

                        I would prefer everything the NCAA does off the court, but the gameplay at the NBA level is a zillion times (to be scientific ) superior.

                        Off to find the stat book ...
                        Amen.

                        Sidenote: I would be 5x more likely to buy a ticket to a Pacers game on a boring night if they had a live band rather than some of the worst songs/ sound effects possible. Let's bring back the band!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          OK - I'm 80% sure that the passage I'm looking for was either written by John Feinstein in the book "Let Me Tell You a Story" or by L. Jon Wertheim in the book "Transition Game - How Hoosiers Went Hip-Hop".

                          It was called "old white guy syndrome" and it showed how - beyond a shadow of a doubt - that both the attitude that the NBA was better in the "old days" and the attitude that NCAA bball is a more "pure" form of the sport compared to NBA ball are not founded in truth.

                          The other 20% of me thinks I read the article online, perhaps in ESPN Insider.
                          I have that book, I could look it up for you tomorrow. Remind me then if you really want to know

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            Well considering that I'm only 20years old, I doubt I fall into the category of an "old white guy."

                            I just don't know how you can say that the NBA isn't a "me" first league when you have players tell management it's either a teammate or them, especially when the duo has already been to 3NBA finals, winning two of them. Yes, I'm talking about Kobe Bryant.

                            JO complained about the new style of offense after 8games, and it went back to just dumping it to him into the low post.

                            This also a time where ESPN runs a show called "street ball" where the whole thing is designed to make your opponent look stupid by throwing the ball of the defenders forehead.

                            In my opinion, high school and college basketball hasn't been touched quite as heavily as the NBA as a "me first" game.

                            BTW, I wasn't old enough to have MJ and Magic shoved down my throat either.

                            EDIT: How many times on this board have we discussed the reasons why the Pacers have a similiar record with JO injured than when he's playing? It's always because we go away from the "JO offense" and play as a team. The league is filled with a whole bunch of iso plays, whether they're for post players or for perimeter, it really doesn't matter.

                            Obviously the NBA is the best in terms of the level of basketball being played. I'm not even coming close to arguing that. Individually, it's the greatest league in the world, with the best players in the world. I would just rather watch a game that was bigger than the "stars," and I think the college game is the best place for it.

                            Just so you aren't on an island I'll agree with you. Here are things you see more at the Pro level that you don't see as much in college.

                            1. Star Treatment- This does happen some, but not nearly as much as it does in the NBA.

                            2. Traveling is called with greater frequency.

                            3. Palming is called with greater frequency.

                            I think since fouls are called with greater frequency, you force people to play more basketball vs. the abridged version we see in the NBA. And especially at a high school level many kids can't dunk, which forces them to work on shooting, passing, etc.

                            It has oft been said that Kareem Abdul Jabbar was so lucky they didn't allow dunking when he was in college. He learned to become a pure shooter vs. just dribbling down the court and throwing the ball in he basket. And I'll take the opinions of guys like Larry and Donny as it relates to the fundamentals of guys who play in college vs. those who have one year or come straight out of high school.

                            Everybody will hate to hear this, but if you want to see the power of teamwork, keep watching Team USA get punked by lesser quality teams b/c of our inability to play as well as a unit.

                            I respect everybody's opinion, but the game played at the collegiate and high school level is way closer to the fundamentals. Are the players as talented? Not by a long shot, but it is often more fun to watch. You also find way more upsets in a one and done tournament vs. the NBA. That always keeps things interesting.
                            “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                            motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                            Reggie Miller

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                              I think you missed my point. The Pacers haven't selected a guy in the top 15 since Reggie Miller that ended up being a real difference maker. I'm not saying some of those guys haven't been decent ball players just not the second coming. A top 15 draft pick doesn't mean anything is all I'm saying, none of those guys you critiqued would make a difference on this team. Even in their primes.....
                              and my point is who were the difference makers that the pacers passed up those years? you say they didn't draft a difference maker but what opportunities did they not jump on? no they may not have been stars, but as i tried to demonstrate how many have been busts? one. nash didn't start to be the star player until dallas and even then it took moving him back to PHX for him to be MVP caliber. kobe was a high school kid, what is more bone-headed not drafting him or trading him for vlade divac? peja... lets face it, had bird been GM we would have been all over peja -- we know how he gets for hot shooting europeans. but the draft is a total crapshoot. none of us knows if greg oden will work out or kevin durant. who knows 5 years from now oden could be in bryant reeves territory and alando tucker (who is predicted to go mid-to-late 1st round) could be MVP. so none of our draft picks have become allstars but many of them have made it in this league and are still playing years later.
                              This is the darkest timeline.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                                If we continue to free fall, at some point, most of you are going to get on the band wagon and start rooting for us to make the 10th spot in the draft.

                                The losing is painful, but it will be more painful to win a few extra games but still finish in ninth place in the Conference and out of the playoffs.

                                I'm frankly not sure we will beat Philly at home. Their guards are much better. JO also is probably not going to last out the season without missing a number of games. Some seem to think that will help us win games; that is crazy talk.

                                Dark stuff I know. But just my opinion.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X