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

Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

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

  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    Just to sum up this conversation

    Bird: We need to get back to playing like a team.
    Frank: We need to play more like a team.
    West: We need to play more like a team.
    Hibbert: We need to play more like a team.
    Paul: We need to be smarter.
    Lance: The defense forces us to play one-on-one
    Some PD Posters: Lance doesn't play one-on-one.
    I acknowledged he isn't playing his best basketball. All I'm saying is I think PGs play has been much more troublesome.
    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

    Comment


    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

      So what's Lance's reasoning for not moving the ball for the past few weeks, if he was just talking about that game?

      And yes, I do blame Lance for Lance not moving the ball.
      I blame PG for not moving the ball.

      I blame those who aren't moving the ball, instead of trying to convince everyone else that they are moving the ball.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

        Tell you what, the only guy on this team, IMHO, who has the credibility to stand up and make public corrections is DWest.

        Period.

        Other folks got way too many issues of their own to be pointing fingers.

        Comment


        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

          Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
          And make sure you take the easy shot in public and give complete pass to the other looming issue.
          Calling someone out publically, is never the easy shot.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            So if he has 5 but clearly left 3 for Lance, would you look at the numbers or the game?

            I would agree that he should get offensive rebounds, but no one is getting ORebs and I have talked about this in other places - it's the herky-jerky form of our offense that keeps guys from being able to anticipate position on a missed shot.
            Yes and I do, I'm definitely not one of the people on here bashing Roy all the time for his rebounding. But I ain't gonna make excuses for it. He's actually a very good offensive rebounder so I cut him some slack for his defensive rebounding most of the time.

            Don't get my wrong I'm actually a huge Roy fan. I was on here defending him his first two years when most people wanted him traded. I love the guys work ethic and defensive presence.
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Calling someone out publically, is never the easy shot.
              easy shot when its the scapegoat. I got major issues with the way Lance handles himself, but to give PG a pass is flat out wrong.

              Comment


              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                I acknowledged he isn't playing his best basketball. All I'm saying is I think PGs play has been much more troublesome.
                Their play is in the same vein though, that's why I don't get all this "But Paul!" stuff. I'll readily admit that Lance is shooting better than Paul, but he's hitting extremely difficult jumpshots. Lance is a very good scorer, but not good enough as a shooter to expect that level of play to continue. He's built his FG% on getting easy shots, now he's taking tough shots.

                I think Paul is the biggest problem, as he's the best player, too. But it's more like 1A and 1B.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                  Pg says he wants lebron to be his mentor then how about doing what lebron does. He hardly ever shoots the three and constantly attacks and post us. Pg looks more like a durant impersonator if you ask me, and a pretty bad one to booth. I really hope he turns it around soon to the player we grew accustomed to in the first months of the season
                  Impossible Is Nothing

                  Comment


                  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                    Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
                    easy shot when its the scapegoat. I got major issues with the way Lance handles himself, but to give PG a pass is flat out wrong.
                    I don't understand how Lance is the "scapegoat" when you say that West is the only one that can say anything, and West is saying the exact same things as Roy, just not as detailed on describing exactly who.

                    That was my point from page 1, that more people are upset that Roy said anything, rather than actually taking issue with what he said.

                    I don't like to pick and choose who tells the truth. The truth can be told by anyone, at any time, as far as I'm concerned. (I do understand the issues of where they're being said)

                    Basically, I hate shooting the messenger.

                    EDIT: For the record, I don't like giving PG a pass either. I'd imagine his salary is the reason though, which isn't good enough for me either.
                    Last edited by Since86; 03-21-2014, 05:06 PM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      So what's Lance's reasoning for not moving the ball for the past few weeks, if he was just talking about that game?

                      And yes, I do blame Lance for Lance not moving the ball.
                      I blame PG for not moving the ball.

                      I blame those who aren't moving the ball, instead of trying to convince everyone else that they are moving the ball.
                      I think our team is lacking movement away from the ball. I think they are taking too long to get into their offense most of the time. Half their possessions they don't even get into their set until their is about 12 seconds on the shot clock.

                      Typically, this leads to perimeter players taking perimeter shots.

                      On top of that PG is STRUGGLING, and Hibbert has been too.

                      When Lance gets the ball, watch the rest of the team and tell me what he's supposed to do with it. The guy is a playmaker, he's always gonna look for a man in scoring position, or a lane to create a scoring opportunity, and I'm not gonna fault him for that, it's his game and it's not gonna change.

                      I actually would like to see Vogel make Lance our primary ball handler/PG. I would trade the occasional turnovers for having him in the middle of the offense where he can be a ball mover/driver. I think putting him on one side limits his game. A lot of times he doesn't get the ball until there has been 10+ seconds run off the shot clock and he's forced to play faster than he should. And usually he's a right handed player on the right side of the offense which makes it tougher to get penetration. But that's me. I would love to see him get the ball, push it up, look to attack off the screen and put pressure on the defenses bigs to play him earlier in the shot clock. This will allow more movement, earlier in the clock, which should improve our offensive flow. Hill will never garner the kind of respect Lance will get coming off a pick and roll.

                      When Hill comes down, he usually walks it up and he just isn't a threat to attack the way Lance is, so the defense gets a chance to set up and by the time our scorers even get the ball, we've lost 10 seconds to get a good shot.

                      Now Lance would have to play smarter basketball, no doubt about that. But I think he's more than capable of doing that.
                      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                      Comment


                      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        No I don't pretend to know exactly what happened because I saw a conversation between two teammates, that's all.

                        Plus, I have played on many teams and there were always guys getting on each other, every game. I didn't play for one team, or coach a team, that had everybody get along, ever. Most teams had guys that flat out didn't like each other and it didn't seem to have any correlation with how good we were. In fact the better the team I was on, the more competitive the guys on our roster usually were WITH EACH OTHER. I'm not sure where this "everybody must be best buddies all the time" line of thinking comes from, but it doesn't equate with my experience in basketball, though I never played in the NBA of course. And as a coach, I don't want guys that get along too well necessarily. But I doubt it's much different in that regard in the NBA. The best team I was ever on had 2 guys that I hated with a passion, ON THE COURT. They acted like ******** most of the time and knew it all. But if they were open, I got them the ball because they could play. And we hung out after the game because they were completely different off the hardwood. Competitiveness can make someone act like a jerk. It doesn't mean it's an issue.

                        What happens off the court when nobody is watching is way more important. And from everything I've seen, Lance is like the teams "class clown" and probably benefits the team more than you know, personality wise. I've yet to see an interview where anyone directly said Lance is a problem in any way. All I've seen is people speak on his first two years and how far he has come.

                        I think the fans who are the most bothered by Lances previous issues over analyze every little thing they see. Anytime him and a teammate have a disagreement it becomes " getting on Lance" or "causing trouble". I don't think that is what it is. The team is losing and trust me, nobody is more frustrated by that than Lance. The dudes a competitor.

                        But then again I don't see just Lance pounding the ball too much, I see our entire offense not moving, guys standing around, and our perimeter players pounding it too much. There isn't one of them playing well. I see our best player shooting a horrible percentage over a 30 game stretch and just settling for the first jumper he gets, I see Roy Hibbert struggling to get position time after time. It's much more than one guy screwing everything up.
                        There's a lot of things here that show me you need to go back and re-read what I'm bringing up. I've never said anything about everybody being buddies, not even close. I've never said anyone on the team outright dislikes Lance. I've not once laid all the blame at the feet of Lance. I'll take this moment to mention since the beginning of the year Lance's ballhandling responsibilities have increased, and since the all-star snub our offense has crumbled. The solution to this, to some, is give him the ball more, despite our offense tanking since he's been given "some extra". Again, that's not blaming him for everything, but I do believe he see's enough of the ball.

                        What I HAVE said, is that Lance gets mad about really stupid, selfish things on the court. It's obnoxious as hell to watch him get mad about teammates passing up 30 fters because he won't get an assist on the play. It's embarrassing that he's running down the floor complaining about not receiving a pass on a play where Hill got a wide open look right at the rim.

                        And no, I don't think that's normal "competitiveness" between teammates. I guess that's where we really disagree.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                          Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                          There's a lot of things here that show me you need to go back and re-read what I'm bringing up. I've never said anything about everybody being buddies, not even close. I've never said anyone on the team outright dislikes Lance. I've not once laid all the blame at the feet of Lance. I'll take this moment to mention since the beginning of the year Lance's ballhandling responsibilities have increased, and since the all-star snub our offense has crumbled. The solution to this, to some, is give him the ball more, despite our offense tanking since he's been given "some extra". Again, that's not blaming him for everything, but I do believe he see's enough of the ball.

                          What I HAVE said, is that Lance gets mad about really stupid, selfish things on the court. It's obnoxious as hell to watch him get mad about teammates passing up 30 fters because he won't get an assist on the play. It's embarrassing that he's running down the floor complaining about not receiving a pass on a play where Hill got a wide open look right at the rim.

                          And no, I don't think that's normal "competitiveness" between teammates. I guess that's where we really disagree.
                          Man I didn't mean to imply YOU said that. I'm just talking in general from people critical of Lance, not just you. Sometimes I lump peoples thoughts together and that's my fault. I'm guilty of hopping all over the place with my posts sometimes. Don't take anything I say personally.

                          Yeah we just disagree on the degree of his affect on the team that's all. But I am the type who accepts a lot of things other people don't and I'm aware of that. I like guys with FIRE, and I feel like Lance has that so I cut him more slack than most.

                          I understand where you are coming from, especially considering this teams history.

                          Btw for me it's not about him getting MORE of the ball, it's about WHEN and WHERE he gets it.
                          Last edited by Taterhead; 03-21-2014, 06:12 PM.
                          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                          Comment


                          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            You've implied it in other threads nuntius.
                            No, I haven't. I have never implied that Roy has an issue with Lance. I don't believe that this is the case and that's why I haven't implied that. I have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you're mixing me up with someone else?

                            I have always said that as long as the team is fine with it then I'm fine with it as well.

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            It is impossible to steal a rebound man. If you get it, you earned it. Dennis Rodman "stole" thousands. Roy won't elbow Stephenson because he won't elbow anyone else, which is why he doesn't get more. Lance is a great rebounder for his position and why that bothers you, I'll never know.

                            The reasoning you use to pit Lance against the rest of the team with this stealing rebounds junk is the exact kind of thing that keeps you from winning championships. John Wooden would be ashamed of that kind of thinking. If Lance stops going after rebounds we become a lesser team for it. And it's one of the things Larry Bird admires most about Lances game. So trust me, Larry ain't gonna buy it either. It's absurd.

                            I think this is the only time I've ever seen a fan be upset with one of his guys for getting too many boards. Wow.
                            I'll say it once again. I don't have any issue with Lance stealing rebounds. I understand why that happens and I support it.

                            What I have an issue with is when ignorant people use that to blame Hibbert about his rebounding. That's what grinds my gears.

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            This is basketball and you wanna talk about fair? Is it little league? You have a chance to get the rebound just like everyone else, if you want it, go get it. And don't give me this "he's boxing out so the guards can get it" baloney. Makes you wonder how Kevin Love ever gets a rebound with all the boxing out he has to do. It's ridiculous.
                            You wanna talk about Kevin Love? Fine.

                            1) Kevin Love will almost never contest a shot. If he has to choose between contesting a shot and positioning himself for a rebound then he'll choose the rebound and pray that the opponent misses. There is a reason why Minnesota is not in the playoffs despite having a great offense and Love's lack of D is a big reason why.

                            2) He's never going to box out so his guards can get the rebound. He will just go for the rebound every chance he gets.

                            3) I'm pretty sure that I have seen KLove elbowing Pekovic in the head in order to grab a defensive rebound out of his hands. That's only anecdotal but it happened when we played them (not sure if it's this season or the last one).
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              No, I haven't. I have never implied that Roy has an issue with Lance. I don't believe that this is the case and that's why I haven't implied that. I have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you're mixing me up with someone else?

                              I have always said that as long as the team is fine with it then I'm fine with it as well.



                              I'll say it once again. I don't have any issue with Lance stealing rebounds. I understand why that happens and I support it.

                              What I have an issue with is when ignorant people use that to blame Hibbert about his rebounding. That's what grinds my gears.



                              You wanna talk about Kevin Love? Fine.

                              1) Kevin Love will almost never contest a shot. If he has to choose between contesting a shot and positioning himself for a rebound then he'll choose the rebound and pray that the opponent misses. There is a reason why Minnesota is not in the playoffs despite having a great offense and Love's lack of D is a big reason why.

                              2) He's never going to box out so his guards can get the rebound. He will just go for the rebound every chance he gets.

                              3) I'm pretty sure that I have seen KLove elbowing Pekovic in the head in order to grab a defensive rebound out of his hands. That's only anecdotal but it happened when we played them (not sure if it's this season or the last one).
                              It's quite possible.

                              Plus you are always arguing about it with me so maybe I got the wrong impression.
                              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                              Comment


                              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                                It's quite possible.

                                Plus you are always arguing about it with me so maybe I got the wrong impression.
                                I'm arguing with a lot of people for a lot of things. I enjoy debating although I really wish that this forum would be more united.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X