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

You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

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

  • #46
    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

    So apparently Saras will run point by passing the ball to someone else?

    If he can't bring the ball upcourt then he can't run point.

    And if he can't shoot and doesn't have good shot selection then he can't play the 2.

    The Pacers have enough quality forwards.

    Can Saras play center? It looks like he'll have to if he wants to wear blue and gold AND see playing time.
    STARBURY

    08 and Beyond

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

      I firmly believe Saras will play very little if at all during the regular season. Armstrong, Greene and Marquis will get the point guard minutes.


      Another thing has me concerned about last night's game. I realize the game wasn't on TV, so only those who were there saw it. (was it on NBA LP?) The Jazz had very little trouble guarding JO in the low post. He had his shot blocked several times, he was getting frustrated, and overall he just wasn't a factor down there.

      The Jazz were very physical as they always are, and it took JO out of his comfort area, he then started rushing a few shots and he just didn't look very good. Even in the 4th quarter (JO played the first probably 7 minutes of the 4th) when he was defended by second stringers, JO still had a lot of trouble. If it weren't for AL the Pacers offense would have looked beyond horrible.

      I just looked at the box score and JO was 4 of 8 which isn't bad at all, maybe I was just in a bad mood last night.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

        Its obvious that Saras's ballhandling is not good at all. However, if he is an asset on the offensive end as a leader, passer and occasionally a shooter, I would say a good coach can do stuff that would at least to some extent hide Saras's poor ballhandling.
        For example when he is bringing the ball upcourt, it is possible to have a big guy set him a pick somewhere around the middle of the court. Now i tell you that when a defender hits that screen hard, he will watch out for it the next time and not put as much pressure on the ball as earlier. I don't know about the NBA, but at least this type of "assistance" is often used in Éurope.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

          Besides Seed had a very good point about how Saras thrives in a passing-game. In the end I actually believe that the Pacers would benefit from this type of offence. As far as I remember the great Pacers teams in late 1990s with Reggie, Marc, Smits etc. played more like a team (less 1-on-1s etc.) than last years Pacers.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

            Uncle Buck.

            While I appreciate your posting about the backcourt & all I need something else as well.

            How did Shawne Williams look? When I saw him in game 1 I was very pleased because he has been talked down so much & I thought he was farther along than they were saying.

            Also how did Josh Powell do? I know box score doesn't show either doing well but we both know that box scores are usually only good for fantasy basketball.

            Other than one box score stat that does bother me. We were beyond horrible at rebounding.

            BTW, although I hate Boozer for what he did to Cleveland, I have always thought he had a good solid game & he always outplayed J.O. becasue he is just a physical player.


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

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

              Saras is a living legend of Euroleague, the same Euroleague that produced Ginobili, Diaw, Gasol, Nocioni, Okur, Turkoglu, Kirilenko, Bargnani, Varejao, Stojakovic, Krstic, Jaric, Giricek, Radmanovic, Brezec, Calderon.

              No idea what's happening to him there in Indianapolis.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                It seems a lot of you guys take these pre-season games fairly seriously. Well, I'm pretty sure the players don't. Do you guys really think Jamal was trying? I didn't see the game, so i'm speaking from ignorance here, but I doubt he's reached the point where guys with the footspeed of Deron Williams are blowing by him yet. But with an 82-game season, plus playoffs, ahead of them I'm pretty sure the guys see this as a practice in front of fans. Nothing more. If Tins problems are sluggish defense and lack of effort in a pre-season game, I'm not concerned. That's to be expected of a guy without competition for his spot and Tins' history of injuries.


                As for Sarunas, I'm sure he's very skilled and talented at the game of basketball. I'd certainly never accuse him of "sucking". But he's simply too slow for his size and strength to play very effectively in the NBA. There's a reason why incredibly talented basketball players like Steve Alford, Gerry MacNamera and Trajan Langdon simply cannot succeed in the NBA. They just have too many physical limitations that are easilly exploitable by the freakish athletes that populate the League. And unfortunately for us, Sarunas has those same limitations. Let's stop pretending and start trying to use him like Steve Kerr or a Fred Hoiberg before we lose another $4 million this year.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I firmly believe Saras will play very little if at all during the regular season. Armstrong, Greene and Marquis will get the point guard minutes.


                  Another thing has me concerned about last night's game. I realize the game wasn't on TV, so only those who were there saw it. (was it on NBA LP?) The Jazz had very little trouble guarding JO in the low post. He had his shot blocked several times, he was getting frustrated, and overall he just wasn't a factor down there.

                  The Jazz were very physical as they always are, and it took JO out of his comfort area, he then started rushing a few shots and he just didn't look very good. Even in the 4th quarter (JO played the first probably 7 minutes of the 4th) when he was defended by second stringers, JO still had a lot of trouble. If it weren't for AL the Pacers offense would have looked beyond horrible.

                  I just looked at the box score and JO was 4 of 8 which isn't bad at all, maybe I was just in a bad mood last night.
                  Yes, it was on DirecTV League Pass, and it was great because it was 100% commercial free, and they used Mr. Boyle and Slick's radio feed as the audio. Where the commercials were supposed to be, they just had an overhead cam with a courtside mic, so I got to see and hear Ashley Bidwell, the Pacemates, the Kiss Cam, the fake car race and everything. It was the closest I've ever felt to being inside Conseco without actually being there.

                  Now, as far as JO in the low post, the way I saw it, they were throwing guys at him left and right and that is the primary reason that Al got the ball so often and was fouled so often. If Al was actualy able to score and get the extra shot rather than miss and go to the line for 2, we would have hurt them more for crowding Jermaine so much.

                  BUT - the offense wasn't any where near the flowing offense of the first game. If we're going to use a "push-the-ball-up" offense, then JO shouldn't get to the post, and he certainly shouldn't get double teamed that often.

                  I don't know if I'll watch the game again, but if I do I'll look to see if JO is frustrated by getting shut down or if he is frustrated by the game plan breaking down. Did the Jazz's defense win the game, or did the pacers offense lose the game? I know it's just a matter of perspective, but after watching the game once, I really think it's the latter, not the former.
                  “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


                  • #54
                    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Uncle Buck.

                    While I appreciate your posting about the backcourt & all I need something else as well.

                    How did Shawne Williams look? When I saw him in game 1 I was very pleased because he has been talked down so much & I thought he was farther along than they were saying.

                    Also how did Josh Powell do? I know box score doesn't show either doing well but we both know that box scores are usually only good for fantasy basketball.

                    Other than one box score stat that does bother me. We were beyond horrible at rebounding.

                    BTW, although I hate Boozer for what he did to Cleveland, I have always thought he had a good solid game & he always outplayed J.O. becasue he is just a physical player.
                    Williams looked better in game 1. Last night he took a three point shot and he missed it wide right, I mean really wide right. Although I can't give any examples from last nights game, but I just have a sense that he has, especially for a young guy, a good feel for the game. I admit though I wasn't focusing on Williams so I can't really say much more about his performance last night. He shot 0 of 4, but none of his mistakes stood out in my mind. Williams is not a great athlete, so all those comparisons to Bedner just aren't even half true.

                    Powell was much, much better in game number 1. Last night he seemed a little lost on the defensive end, as far as being in the right place at the right time and what to do within the team defensive stuff. I certainly like his physicalness though, he provides a physical presense on the court and we need that. His rebounding wasn't factor, or I should say it was a non-factor, he looked tired last night to me.

                    Boozer looked good last night (except for his horrible looking free throws, I thought he was a good shooter) but overall his defense was rather good and he gave JO fits with his physical play.

                    Marshall struggled in the starting lineup, he made several defensive mistakes one on an inbound play and he just wasn't very good. White wasn't very good either.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                      Originally posted by AirLithuania View Post
                      Its obvious that Saras's ballhandling is not good at all. However, if he is an asset on the offensive end as a leader, passer and occasionally a shooter, I would say a good coach can do stuff that would at least to some extent hide Saras's poor ballhandling.
                      For example when he is bringing the ball upcourt, it is possible to have a big guy set him a pick somewhere around the middle of the court. Now i tell you that when a defender hits that screen hard, he will watch out for it the next time and not put as much pressure on the ball as earlier. I don't know about the NBA, but at least this type of "assistance" is often used in Éurope.
                      How can a second year player be a leader on the team? And why waste a big body that coould be getting position in the post for a feed by making him set a pick when you could just sub in anpthe rPG who can DRIBBLE AND SHOOT and not have to?
                      STARBURY

                      08 and Beyond

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                        Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
                        How can a second year player be a leader on the team? And why waste a big body that coould be getting position in the post for a feed by making him set a pick when you could just sub in anpthe rPG who can DRIBBLE AND SHOOT and not have to?
                        I wonder if your'e asking these as rethoric questions, because I think they are great ones. And I mean it with absolutely no connection to Saras whatsoever.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          BUT - the offense wasn't any where near the flowing offense of the first game. If we're going to use a "push-the-ball-up" offense, then JO shouldn't get to the post, and he certainly shouldn't get double teamed that often.
                          I think it was you who wrote it - so far we suck on the perimeter.
                          I guess if we could pose a threat from downtown, the defence wouldn't be crowding around JO so much.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                            Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
                            How can a second year player be a leader on the team? And why waste a big body that coould be getting position in the post for a feed by making him set a pick when you could just sub in anpthe rPG who can DRIBBLE AND SHOOT and not have to?

                            By leader I meant an emotional leader, I think you know what I mean.

                            For a big man setting a pick, well, I guess you could put it that way. However,
                            1) how often does the ball go straight down low to the post? and anyway the big man will have time to get under the basket...
                            2) setting picks like that can be used as a way of intimidating opposition players
                            3) if the pick works well the pg can get an advantage over his defender or a possible mismatch is created

                            Of course everyone would like to have a pg who could pass, shoot, dribble, be an emotional leader, have a good understanding of the game and be athletic and a good defender. However these kind of players are kind of rare, and I can't think of any in the NBA right now (pg I mean - Nash can't defend, Iverson if you count him can't pass nor can Marbury, Kidd isn't that good shooter etc.). You have to stick with what you've got.
                            Although Saras can't defend or dribble that well, he can shoot, pass and create plays and he understands the game.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                              Originally posted by Seed View Post

                              The answer lies in the offense game of the whole team. The game in Europe is not based on 1/1 moves, but on ball movement.
                              Yes, the NBA and Euro league are very different games. IMO, it is a combination of the style AND quickness in the NBA that make it tough on Saras.

                              As for style (i.e. ball movement), I think the number of times Saras gets the ball back during a half court set has a lot to do with it. If the style is ball movement his ball handling weakness is diminished significantly, and he gets his hands on the ball more often outside the context of bringing it up the floor...so you have a good point. In fact, I think the Euro style is a superior form of basketball and is the primary reason our better athletes are losing at the international level.

                              As for quickness, that is a separate issue. The NBA is filled with ultra quick guards. Many great NCAA players fail to make it in the NBA completely due to their lack of athleticism and quickness in particular. Consequently, I will need to see Saras succeed before I believe he can do it in the NBA...regardless of the style of team he plays on.

                              ...so in short, his best bet is to get on a passing oriented team. I don't think this Pacer team is a good fit for him.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I firmly believe Saras will play very little if at all during the regular season. Armstrong, Greene and Marquis will get the point guard minutes.

                                Another thing has me concerned about last night's game. I realize the game wasn't on TV, so only those who were there saw it. (was it on NBA LP?) The Jazz had very little trouble guarding JO in the low post. He had his shot blocked several times, he was getting frustrated, and overall he just wasn't a factor down there.

                                The Jazz were very physical as they always are, and it took JO out of his comfort area, he then started rushing a few shots and he just didn't look very good. Even in the 4th quarter (JO played the first probably 7 minutes of the 4th) when he was defended by second stringers, JO still had a lot of trouble. If it weren't for AL the Pacers offense would have looked beyond horrible.

                                I just looked at the box score and JO was 4 of 8 which isn't bad at all, maybe I was just in a bad mood last night.
                                I knew teams would be able to push us around. Not sure why people were ever excited about the small ball with undersized players in the front court. No perimeter game and a collapsing defense just puts fuel on the fire.

                                On a more positive note, maybe Saturday's performance was due to lack of certain personnel and a very physical practice earlier that day.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X