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

Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

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

  • Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

    Perhaps worthless is the wrong choice of words to describe it. Maybe redundant or superfluous would be better.

    How many games would we have won in the last 21 if JO had not played in any of them. I'm betting on more than the 3 that we have.

    No doubt, JO has gutted it out and put up some pretty decent numbers playing with his injuries, but at what cost? Let's face it, we are two entirely different teams with and without JO. We just can't have our cake and eat it to. In fact, we have been two different teams for the last two season with and without JO.

    A prime example is the game we played against the Spurs. Everyone was involved, constant movement to get open and Tinsley was dishing to several players as a PG should. The defense couldn't key on one player.

    Enter JO last night against the Pistons, we revert back to trying to force feed JO and from the last part of the 2nd quarter on, we stink. This is nothing new. We've seen it time and time again. We are an inspired ball team without JO, no doubt. I don't have to tell the informed fan this because they've seen it as well as I over the last two seasons or so and it's been discussed thoroughly.

    This is not a knock on JO as he is a great player but we have a choice to make. If we keep JO, we need to tailor the team around him so we can have the right players who excel in that mode. If we're not going to do that, then JO has to move on.......no ands, buts, and ifs about it. Personally, I don't think JO can or will lead us to much of anything.

    I haven't checked the stats out lately but am guessing that we are as least as good of a team without JO as with him, record-wise. So, why are we paying a player over 18 million if he's not going to improve our record? If our record is the same with or without him, just think what that $18 could by us as far as talent....at least a few more victories.

    We can blame our downward spiral on the last trade (I have other opinions on that), and let JO off the hook but it wasn't any different before the trade. We were still two different teams when JO was in, our offense coming to a screeching halt with the ball going through JO for a 10 ft jump shot. There's only one big man shooting a jumper that will lead you anywhere and he plays for Dallas. He's one of a kind.

    Personally, I think it's time JO moved on...I've had all the same lip service from him that I can tolerate. He's been saying the same thing for years.
    .

  • #2
    Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

    JO is putting his own personal glory and supposed reputation as a "tough warrior", (not THAT's a stretch), way ahead of the team's best interests.

    Putting up big individual numbers is completely pointless and counter to the basic principles and purpose of playing basketball. The idea is to WIN THE GAME, not put up a lot of points in a losing effort.

    There have been many occasions where the team would have been better off if JO had sat and rested. I am POSITIVE that the win over the Spurs just killed him...to see his teammates beat one of the NBA's best teams without him. It just proved that the team is capable of playing well....but funny how it never seems to happen when the offense is ploddingly running through the low post.

    So, in answer to the question posed in this thread, I say "yes", he has been pretty worthless (as it relates to winning and losing).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

      Originally posted by Roy Munson View Post
      JO is putting his own personal glory and supposed reputation as a "tough warrior", (not THAT's a stretch), way ahead of the team's best interests.

      Putting up big individual numbers is completely pointless and counter to the basic principles and purpose of playing basketball. The idea is to WIN THE GAME, not put up a lot of points in a losing effort.

      There have been many occasions where the team would have been better off if JO had sat and rested. I am POSITIVE that the win over the Spurs just killed him...to see his teammates beat one of the NBA's best teams without him. It just proved that the team is capable of playing well....but funny how it never seems to happen when the offense is ploddingly running through the low post.

      So, in answer to the question posed in this thread, I say "yes", he has been pretty worthless (as it relates to winning and losing).

      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

        It's hard to say exactly why JO has given so much effort to play lately none of us will really ever know. It could be him trying to lead this team by example trying to show the guys the length he will go to put forth that effort. Which could be true he learned a lot about leadership from Reggie who led by example as well. Then again maybe the TPTB are encouraging him to play to keep his value up. Whatever reason it is he should be applauded for his effort.
        Vita sine honore vivere not est.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

          Let's face it, we are two entirely different teams with and without JO.
          Seattle 103, Indy 102
          Philly 100, Indy 96
          Cleveland 99, Indy 88
          Minny 86, Indy 81
          New Jersey 118, Indiana 94

          Is that what you had in mind roughly? Sure, who wouldn't want more of that.

          Frankly I'm more in favor of games like the Miami game when JO played and at the very least rebounded and defended extremely well.

          Is it chance that you picked 21 games? Just happens to start right after JO played well in 3 straight Pacers wins.

          And since when did 15-24, 14 rebounds, 2 steals and 39 points become "superfluous" in a 92-90 game? Like if you removed that they would have done better, give us a break.

          Try running these numbers, wins and losses tied to the FG% of DunMurph since the trade.

          Or maybe opponents FG% in games without JO or in losses in general. At least JO defends the rim very well even on bad shooting nights. He even took yet another charge in the NJ loss. He took one on freaking Ben Gordan outside the arc in the Chicago game. Dude is by far the best defender the team has. I'm certain he leads the team in charges taken just as he did last year (despite missing so many games he had double the 2nd place guy Granger).


          Pre-trade 20-18
          in between loss to go to 20-19
          Post-trade 12-23

          Post-trade with JO - 12-18
          Post-trade without JO - 0-5

          We got a clear trade effect and we talkin' bout JO. Not the trade, not the new players, not defensive issues. We talkin' bout JO.

          You tell 'em AI.


          I haven't checked the stats out lately but am guessing that we are as least as good of a team without JO as with him, record-wise.
          Horrible instincts on that one. Unless W-L is another stat I twisted, another number that lies.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Seattle 103, Indy 102
            Philly 100, Indy 96
            Cleveland 99, Indy 88
            Minny 86, Indy 81
            New Jersey 118, Indiana 94

            Is that what you had in mind roughly? Sure, who wouldn't want more of that.

            Frankly I'm more in favor of games like the Miami game when JO played and at the very least rebounded and defended extremely well.

            Is it chance that you picked 21 games? Just happens to start right after JO played well in 3 straight Pacers wins.

            And since when did 15-24, 14 rebounds, 2 steals and 39 points become "superfluous" in a 92-90 game? Like if you removed that they would have done better, give us a break.

            Try running these numbers, wins and losses tied to the FG% of DunMurph since the trade.

            Or maybe opponents FG% in games without JO or in losses in general. At least JO defends the rim very well even on bad shooting nights. He even took yet another charge in the NJ loss. He took one on freaking Ben Gordan outside the arc in the Chicago game. Dude is by far the best defender the team has. I'm certain he leads the team in charges taken just as he did last year (despite missing so many games he had double the 2nd place guy Granger).


            Pre-trade 20-18
            in between loss to go to 20-19
            Post-trade 12-23

            Post-trade with JO - 12-18
            Post-trade without JO - 0-5

            We got a clear trade effect and we talkin' bout JO. Not the trade, not the new players, not defensive issues. We talkin' bout JO.

            You tell 'em AI.



            Horrible instincts on that one. Unless W-L is another stat I twisted, another number that lies.
            I know the post trade can't be 0-5...we just won without him against the Spurs.

            JO's effect on the team goes far deeper than numbers. Sure, he's put up some decent stats but what in the hell does that have to do with anything? 'Nique use to put up some great numbers but did it relate to any wins? How about Gasol? Does his numbers mean more V's? How about KG. Stats don't mean diddly when you aren't winning.

            You know as well as I do that we are an entirely different team without JO and have been for about 2 1/2 seasons. With JO, we are a plodding half-court, uncertain team. Without him, we show ball movement and Tins suddenly becomes a PG.

            I used to back him all the way, but I've seen too many times that he hasn't shown what a true leader is all about. It's time to tailor the team to his way of playing or send him packing.

            If he was putting up 30 pts, 15 boards and 5 blocks, and taking charges or whatever would it make any difference if we still had a losing team?

            His biggest stat pales in comparison to other post players...44.6% shooting. I don't care if he does take more jumpers than other big men...it doesn't matter. What counts is putting the damn ball through the hole.
            .

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

              JO has not been worthless, but I think it's quite fair to say that he is diminished at this point. He's being incredibly hampered by injuries and seems to be refusing to adjust his game accordingly.

              Just look at his March numbers vs. his Feb. numbers if you want proof:

              March - 12 games
              18.6 pts, 1.2 asts, 7.3 reb, 1.0 blks. - 31.8 min

              Feb - 10 games
              22.4 pts, 2.3 asts, 10.3 reb, 3.4 blks. - 37.0 min

              Naptown has done an excellent job pointing out JO's most important contributions to the team - rebounding and defense. I shouldn't have to point out that as soon as JO stopped getting rebounds and blocks, the Pacers went 2-14 in March.

              When you watch the Pacers, it's clear that JO is not able to play the way he was at the beginning of the season. He doesn't have the lift and energy in his legs right now.

              I don't think it's necessarily JO's presence that is hurting the Pacers right now. I think it's an inability to adjust his focus. Whether this is coming from him or the coaching staff, I don't know.

              In short, I think the Pacers would be a better team from here on out if JO focused less on scoring and more on rebounding and blocking/altering shots.

              Right now 12 pts, 10 rebs, 2 blks > 18 pts, 7 rebs, 1 blk.
              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

              - Salman Rushdie

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Seattle 103, Indy 102
                Philly 100, Indy 96
                Cleveland 99, Indy 88
                Minny 86, Indy 81
                New Jersey 118, Indiana 94
                A one point loss to the Sonics. Remember how many point blank shots at the rim they had with 5 seconds to go? Tinsley missed two, Foster and Granger both missed one. They had four shots to win that one and just came up short.

                Tinsley and Daniels also missed the Philly game. That was a four point loss won by Andre Miller and Kyle Korver at the line.

                Daniels also missed the T-wolves game. A five point loss that was also sealed at the line.

                They got smoked in the two other games but did make a strong comeback against the Cavs. I'm starting to edge my way over to the "JO isn't all that" camp. In the 11 games JO has missed, the Pacers have outrebounded the opponents 8 times and attempted more shots 8 times. There have also been a couple of other key elements to the losses besides O'Neal absence.


                The eleven games JO has missed:

                The Wiz won because of poor shooting, turnovers, Arenas' 40 points but not lack of an interior presence. The Pacers outrebounded the Wiz, had more blocked shots. The Wiz beat us on transition which JO isn't effective at defensively. 35 points on 25 turnovers.

                The next game JO missed, the Pacers beat the Blazers.

                Then came the Cavs. JO was out and Rick sent Jack packing before halftime. Rick's great idea with JO out was to put Runi in at the 2 guard. The Pacers were thumped in this game. No JO and no Jack.

                The next game against the Bulls. No JO, Jack, Al or Marquis.

                The Pacers beat the Rockets.

                The Seattle game should have been a win and Daniels was out too.

                The Sixers game was winnable with JO, Tinsley and Marquis out.

                The Cavs game was lost in the first quarter w/o JO and Marquis.

                T-Wolves no JO or Daniels and Jeff left in the fourth with back problems lost by 5.

                The Nets blew the Pacers away.

                They beat the Spurs.

                My point is JO being out isn't necessarily the reason for the loss. Not very many teams are gonna win without a couple of key players or more in some cases.
                I'm in these bands
                The Humans
                Dr. Goldfoot
                The Bar Brawlers
                ME

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                  Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                  QFMFT


                  Regards,

                  Since86

                  On a side note, putting up good numbers usually results in playing good basketball. If he were to shoot the ball, say, 50 times and only hit 10-14 of them for his 20+ pts, then there would be a problem.

                  He's averaging his career high in assists, which is third on the team, BTW.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                    I didn't see the game, but the Spurs probably had more to do with us beating them than not haveing JO did. They have played down to teams all season and have let teams win that they shouldn't have.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                      I'm interested in the record next season without JO (and Tinsley?) but with his replacement(s). I'm positive it will be better than this season.
                      Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                        Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                        JO has not been worthless, but I think it's quite fair to say that he is diminished at this point. He's being incredibly hampered by injuries and seems to be refusing to adjust his game accordingly.

                        Just look at his March numbers vs. his Feb. numbers if you want proof:

                        March - 12 games
                        18.6 pts, 1.2 asts, 7.3 reb, 1.0 blks. - 31.8 min

                        Feb - 10 games
                        22.4 pts, 2.3 asts, 10.3 reb, 3.4 blks. - 37.0 min

                        Naptown has done an excellent job pointing out JO's most important contributions to the team - rebounding and defense. I shouldn't have to point out that as soon as JO stopped getting rebounds and blocks, the Pacers went 2-14 in March.

                        When you watch the Pacers, it's clear that JO is not able to play the way he was at the beginning of the season. He doesn't have the lift and energy in his legs right now.

                        I don't think it's necessarily JO's presence that is hurting the Pacers right now. I think it's an inability to adjust his focus. Whether this is coming from him or the coaching staff, I don't know.

                        In short, I think the Pacers would be a better team from here on out if JO focused less on scoring and more on rebounding and blocking/altering shots.

                        Right now 12 pts, 10 rebs, 2 blks > 18 pts, 7 rebs, 1 blk.
                        The point I'm trying to drive home is that if JO had sat out the last 21 games, we would probably have won more than 3 games. Sure, we are a better team with JO but if it doesn't help in the "V" department than why have an $18 million millstone around your neck?
                        .

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                          Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                          I'm interested in the record next season without JO (and Tinsley?) but with his replacement(s). I'm positive it will be better than this season.
                          I'm pretty positive is JO is traded for a young player and/or picks, a bad contract and a decen player ... we will be way worse. However, as it seems now we are not going to keep our pick this year, which means we will have a higher pick next year (IF JO IS traded for what I described above) when we will get to keep it and can start or continue (IF we get that pick/young player in a JO trade) reloading.

                          Hey,... you have to try to see something positive in this situation.

                          Regards,

                          Mourning
                          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                            Remember when the 76ers traded Barkley. It got a team into the finals.
                            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Has JO been worthless in the last 21 games?

                              Originally posted by Roferr View Post
                              I know the post trade can't be 0-5...we just won without him against the Spurs.
                              My mistake, that made it 1-5. I missed the 2 April games at the bottom of the game log.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X