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

2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

    http://http://insider.espn.go.com/nb...PERDiem-101102
    John Hollinger ESPN Insider November 2, 2010
    Free Kevin Love!



    The movement breaking out in Minnesota to release the Timberwolves' best player from his 25-minute-per-game shackles has spread far and wide, especially since the one obstacle to increased playing time -- a frontcourt pairing with the equally immobile Al Jefferson -- was rectified over the summer.



    Instead, Love sat out the fourth quarter on opening day so that journeyman Anthony Tolliver could play in crunch time, and the two following games have brought no greater solace to Love fans.



    This comes despite no decline in Love's freakish output on the glass. In his third NBA season, Love is averaging an eye-popping 20.8 rebounds per 40 minutes and ranks third in the league in rebound rate (25.6). He's been in a bit of a shooting slump at 34.2 percent through three games, but even so, the 22-year-old is averaging better than a point every two minutes; he's also entitled to miss a few shots after leading the NBA in player efficiency rate (PER) during the preseason.



    Despite his recent stints on the pine, however, Love is still the captain of this year's All-Breakout Team. That's right, it's that time again -- we're nominating this year's candidates for breakout seasons. Last year's squad included the league's Most Improved Player (Aaron Brooks) and the runner-up (Kevin Durant), along with a couple of picks we'd like to have back. (Elton Brand? Seriously, John, wutdahell?)



    This year we're looking harder at players who are deeper into their career and showed improvement over the summer, and a bit less at the second-year phenoms (actually, I have only two second-year players this time). While young players remain dominant, this year's squad focuses more on third- and fourth-year players.



    Getting back to Love: He qualifies on multiple levels. First, he was really good a year ago, with an All-Star-caliber PER of 20.72. Second, one of the barriers to his playing more has been removed with the Jefferson trade. Third, he improved over the summer, busting out an accurate 3-point shot. Finally, even though he hasn't played significantly more in the first three games, I maintain that no team could possibly be stupid enough to keep a player of this caliber in such a limited role all season … especially one with options as limited as Minnesota's.



    So Love is my captain, as well as my Most Improved pick, in spite of his franchise's obstinance. Now let's meet the rest of the 15-man roster.



    Group I: I know what you did last summer


    Everybody in this group showed up in training camp looking far better than they had in previous years, and managed to carry it through the first few games.

    Mike Conley, Memphis Grizzlies
    The public perception is that Conley's five-year, $45 million extension is preposterous. Those who have seen him in preseason and the first three regular-season games, however, will tell you that Conley is one of the league's most improved players.



    "He appears much faster," said one scout who wasn't sure if Conley had genuinely become faster or simply figured out how to make use of his speed on the basketball court. Conley also appears to have a bigger role in the offense than last year's pass-to-the-wing-and-jog-to-the-weakside-corner routine.



    A career 38.3 percent 3-point shooter, Conley needed only to make his drive-and-dish game more of a weapon to become one of the league's better operators; for years I'd been puzzled by his inability to do so given his quickness. Apparently, he's starting to figure it out. I'm still not sure if it makes him a $45 million player, but this extension might not seem nearly as silly in a couple of months.



    (By the way, for those asking why Memphis' Marc Gasol also wasn't extended: As a second-round pick originally, he's not on a rookie-scale contract. The maximum Memphis could give him in an extension starts at just under $4 million a year, which I think we can all agree is a wee bit below the Bearded Wonder's market value.)



    Roy Hibbert, Indiana Pacers
    The story for Hibbert isn't the 18.3 points per game (up from 11.7 last season); it's the other stuff. For starters, he appears to have lost weight and is now in much better condition. That helps him play longer stretches; more importantly, his fitness helps him avoid the fouls that prevented him from playing long stretches previously. Hibbert has just 11 personals in 104 minutes thus far, and at that rate he can average in the high 30s in minutes. Last season his foul trouble was so persistent he averaged just 25.1.


    Second, Hibbert has begun to read double-teams and make incisive passes for easy buckets. He has 14 dimes in three games, including several in which he turned to read the defense and found a cutter at the rim. He's reportedly been working with assistant coach Vitaly Potapenko on his post game, and it appears to be paying dividends.

    Lou Williams, Philadelphia 76ers
    Philly's backcourt is crowded enough that I'm not sure if Williams will get consistently high minutes, especially given Doug Collins' erratic rotations so far. (He started Jason Kapono the first two games. And it reportedly wasn't on a dare or as part of a super-early lottery-tanking strategy. He genuinely thought it gave him the best chance of winning. Also, somebody needs to tell Doug that Marreese Speights is on the team.)



    But here's what's caught my eye about Williams: 18 free throw attempts in three games. That doesn't seem to be an accident. He's come back from the summer with a very effective shot-fake move that he's using to get defenders in the air and then draw fouls on jump shots. Williams averaged a little better than a free throw for every three field goal attempts last season and still had a very solid 57.6 true shooting percentage; should that free throw number jump this season, as I suspect it will, he'll be one of the league's most efficient backcourt scorers.



    Arron Afflalo, Denver Nuggets
    Afflalo followed up a very strong preseason by erupting for 22 in the Nuggets' surprise blowout of Utah on opening night. While he's cooled off a bit since then, he does have three straight double-figure efforts after averaging just 8.8 points per game last season.



    In particular, he seems both more willing and more able to put the ball on the floor and get to the basket. Afflalo's bread-and-butter will always be spotting up for 3s, but complementing it with the threat of the drive should make him a more potent offensive force … as well as making defenders think twice when closing out on his 3-pointer.




    Group II: Opportunity knocks



    Increased minutes and increased touches tend to accelerate our perception of improvement. These players look genuinely better, but the greater part of their increase in perceived value will come from a boost in their stats.


    Andrea Bargnani, Toronto Raptors
    I don't think Reggie Evans is an NBA starter by any means, but one thing Evans' presence has done is allow Bargnani to be Bargnani. Unfettered by any worries over things like screening, defending or rebounding (he has only nine boards in three games), Il Mago -- Italian for "The Magician" -- has moved to the perimeter and bombed away. To great effect, I might add: He's averaging 23.3 points per game and has only four total turnovers on the season. This is the scorer Toronto thought it was getting with the top overall pick in 2006; Chris Bosh's departure may be giving him the breathing room to finally become that player.


    Paul Millsap, Utah Jazz
    Everyone already knows what Millsap can do after his amazing double-double streak during Carlos Boozer's injury two seasons ago, so it's no surprise that Millsap has thrived as a full-time starter thus far. Even as Utah stumbled out of the gate, Millsap has been rock solid, averaging 21.3 points and 12.3 boards and shooting 63.4 percent in Utah's first three games. He won't keep up that lofty pace, but he's a good bet to put up numbers that aren't too far off from what Boozer was giving them.


    Dorell Wright, Golden State Warriors
    I was skeptical of Wright's 38.9 percent 3-point mark in Miami last season, but he's passing the eye test in a big way in his new gig with the Warriors. As Golden State's starting small forward he's stroking the long ball confidently, making 11 of 20 in his first three games while providing the rarest of rarities -- a solid defensive presence -- on the wing. I thought he'd be the weak link in the Warriors' starting five, but it's not looking that way so far. If he can stay healthy, he figures to be a factor in the Most Improved voting.


    Rajon Rondo, Boston Celtics
    It's not exactly a state secret that Rondo can play. What's different this season is that the Celtics appear to be running much more offense through him than in previous seasons. He's on par for a career high in usage rate, which helps explain how he has 50 assists in three games. Plus, he seems destined to average close to 40 minutes a game given Boston's iffy situation at backup point guard and the age of his cohorts.


    Additionally, Rondo is 24 years old, which is pretty close to the peak age for his class of player. Speedy point guards tend to bloom younger than other positions, so if Rondo was going to bust out, this would seem to be the year.

    D.J. Augustin, Charlotte Bobcats
    I like Augustin this season on multiple fronts. First, my projection system picked him to have one of the league's greatest PER gains. Second, he's likely to double his minutes from the 18.4 he played last season, as Raymond Felton's departure made him the starter at the point by default. And finally, he can play a lot better than he did a year ago. Augustin had an impressive rookie season but regressed badly as a sophomore. But between his quickness going to the rim and his 3-point shot he should be able to score consistently, and so far (17.3 points per game) he has.

    Ramon Sessions, Cleveland Cavaliers
    Liberated from a horrendous fit in Minnesota's triangle, Sessions could prove a steal as a third guard in Cleveland. While he uncorked an epic stinker in Friday's 20-point loss in Toronto, he was very good in the Cavs' other two games and should thrive in a system that is likely to place the ball in his hands frequently -- much as he succeeded in a similar environment in Milwaukee.



    Group III: Injury timeouts



    Because of injury -- either this season, last season, or both -- these players are under the radar in the early part of the season. But keep an eye on them as we get deeper in the calendar, because they could be big stories by spring.


    Rodrigue Beaubois, Dallas Mavericks
    I still don't know whether Dallas has the stones to blow up its guard rotation and let Beaubois energize what's become a fairly staid offense, but given how well he played last season, the Mavs should seriously consider it. Beaubois averaged 22.7 points per 40 minutes last season and led all rookies in PER -- yes, it was Beaubois, and not Stephen Curry or Tyreke Evans. He broke his left foot over the summer and still hasn't returned, so he'll be trying to burrow his way into an established, veteran rotation. But he might be good enough that the Mavs have no choice.



    Nicolas Batum, Portland Trail Blazers
    Because Batum missed most of 2009-10 with a shoulder injury and then aggravated it in the playoffs, his stellar performance in 37 late-season games (51.9 percent shooting, 17.31 PER) garnered relatively little attention. He's in the lineup from Day 1 this season, and played very well in Portland's first three games before mysteriously getting lifted after 18 minutes Monday night in a loss to the Bulls. He's only 21 and he's a career 39 percent 3-point shooter who will have plenty of opportunities given the attention Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge draw; it's quite possible he scores in the midteens on average.


    Anthony Randolph, New York Knicks
    Randolph missed all but eight games last season with an ankle injury and then sprained it in preseason with the Knicks. He hasn't played a regular-season game with his new team, and we have to start being concerned about how prone he is to injuries. But the 21-year-old is still one of the most unique players in the league, a Camby-esque shot-blocker who can handle the ball like a guard and score around the basket.



    Randolph was a Jekyll-and-Hyde player in Golden State, but one suspects that further maturity and a move away from the Warriors' poisonous environment could help him considerably. PER-wise, he projected to have the league's largest improvement in 2010-11, to a stratospheric 21.48. The minutes are there for the taking in a thin Knicks frontcourt, especially since Amare Stoudemire can easily shift to center.



    Group V: Let's be clear what we mean by "breakout"


    Johnson

    James Johnson, Chicago Bulls
    He's not going to emerge as any kind of star and is trapped behind Luol Deng and Carlos Boozer at the forward spots, so temper your expectations. However, Johnson looks to be in vastly better shape than he was last season and has played very well in his chances, both in preseason and the regular season. The Bulls aren't terribly deep, so he should get opportunities, and he has one other item in his favor: turnovers. Johnson had a shockingly high turnover rate as a rookie, but paradoxically mistake-prone rookies tend to make a lot more progress in subsequent seasons. Johnson appears to be following that trend line.


    Finally, three other players -- Sacramento's Darnell Jackson, Charlotte's Derrick Brown and the Clippers' DeAndre Jordan -- warrant mention under this heading. None of them will play heavy minutes, but I've been impressed with the early-season work of each. If my All-Breakout team were allowed three D-League assignees for my final cuts, they'd be on it.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

    i dont get why the Twolves arent playin Love more. I think we should see what it would take to get him he is being misused.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
      i dont get why the Twolves arent playin Love more. I think we should see what it would take to get him he is being misused.
      the timberwolves are such a weird team

      i dont understand them and how they use there players or how they even acquire there players

      i also hate david kahn so much what a tool

      "oh we wont take any contracts for jefferson only a lot of money and drafts picks" - kahn

      "lets buy michael beasley from miami and give them a draft pick" - kahn

      "lets draft 5 pgs and sign luke ridnour and have to trade sessions to get another pg back in telfair" - kahn
      Last edited by Scot Pollard; 11-02-2010, 02:46 PM.
      In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

        Well I thought he might help Tyler but the fact that he is also helping Roy is great.

        I called in in post # 40

        http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...tapenko&page=2


        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

          Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
          the timberwolves are such a weird team

          i dont understand them and how they use there players or how they even acquire there players

          i also hate david kahn so much what a tool

          "oh we wont take any contracts for jefferson only a lot of money and drafts picks" - kahn

          "lets buy michael beasley from miami and give them a draft pick" - kahn

          "lets draft 5 pgs and sign luke ridnour and have to trade sessions to get another pg back in telfair" - kahn
          Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

            Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
            the timberwolves are such a weird team

            i dont understand them and how they use there players or how they even acquire there players

            i also hate david kahn so much what a tool

            "oh we wont take any contracts for jefferson only a lot of money and drafts picks" - kahn

            "lets buy michael beasley from miami and give them a draft pick" - kahn
            "lets draft 5 pgs and sign luke ridnour and have to trade sessions to get another pg back in telfair" - kahn
            that was a smart he will be a 20 and 8 type player. I wish the pacers could have got him. I have watched them play 2 gms already gonna watch 2nite vs the heat. I think they just need to fire kurt rambis they traded Jefferson so KLove could play 35 mins a game and be the guy i just dont get the twolves.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
              i dont get why the Twolves arent playin Love more. I think we should see what it would take to get him he is being misused.
              His defense isn't as good as the T-Wolves caoching staff would like.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                His defense isn't as good as the T-Wolves caoching staff would like.
                ya i know that from watching thier games but i mean he is so much better than tolliver it isnt even funny. His bad defense doesnt out wieght wat he does out on the court. Then why didnt they just trade Love and keep Jefferson??

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  ya i know that from watching thier games but i mean he is so much better than tolliver it isnt even funny. His bad defense doesnt out wieght wat he does out on the court. Then why didnt they just trade Love and keep Jefferson??
                  Because his defense is even worse.

                  I don't have time to look it up now but I made a post last year where I complained that I had never seen a player less interested in defense than Al Jefferson was during games vs. the Pacers last year.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Because his defense is even worse.

                    I don't have time to look it up now but I made a post last year where I complained that I had never seen a player less interested in defense than Al Jefferson was during games vs. the Pacers last year.
                    but they played jefferson a lot last yr i just dont get the decsions they make at all.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 2010-11 All Break Out Team : ESPN Insider(Roy Mentioned)

                      Love is not that bad as a defender. Al Jefferson is a sieve, Love is slightly below average to average. Beasley is a lot worse. His quality on offense+backboards easily outweighs whatever he gives up defensively. Yank him when he's playing well below his ability defensively but playing him 25mpg is absurd. Give him Kosta Koufos minutes, go with Darko-Love-Pekovic-Tolliver.

                      ----

                      Potapenko did a great job with the Mad Ants bigs last season. If Hibbert has a breakout year, his reputation will grow even more. Actually I'm hoping Ainge is looking at him, Boston will need someone to replace Clifford Ray.

                      ------

                      Really liked what I saw from Johnson so far. Needs to keep up the defensive effort to earn minutes. Wright was a quality role-player hidden in Miami, nice to see people are finally starting to pay attention.

                      Randolph... I don't think this is the right situation for Randolph. D'Antoni doesn't have patience for the kind of mistakes Randolph commits + Randolph needs a coach more focused on defense.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X