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

RC's use of Sarunas

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

  • RC's use of Sarunas

    So from what i've seen on other threads, it seems like we'd all agree that he's not being used properly IE: He's firstly a playmaker and floor leader and secondly a guy who can hit his shots when he's developped a rhythm.
    Bottom line, he's not a guy you can put in the game for 2 minutes and expect him to just start draining threes before breaking a sweat. I just don't understand how RC doesn't see this. Bottom line, Saras has looked amazing the past two years in the games he's played significant minutes at the point.
    For that, SOME of the blame for his lack of success has to be laid on Rick Carlisle. I'm 100% confident that if Sarunas had as much leaway to make mistakes as Jackson or Tinsley do, he would be one of the top 5 backup point guards in the league right now, if not the starter for this team.

    What I would like to see: Give Sarunas 10 games in a row to play 20 minutes as backup point guard without pulling him every time he makes a mistake and sitting him for 5 games. If this was done, I guarantee he would thrive, especially since he's shown great chemistry with our other bench players.

    What are your thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: RC's use of Sarunas

    Originally posted by rimock31 View Post
    So from what i've seen on other threads, it seems like we'd all agree that he's not being used properly IE: He's firstly a playmaker and floor leader and secondly a guy who can hit his shots when he's developped a rhythm.
    Bottom line, he's not a guy you can put in the game for 2 minutes and expect him to just start draining threes before breaking a sweat. I just don't understand how RC doesn't see this. Bottom line, Saras has looked amazing the past two years in the games he's played significant minutes at the point.
    For that, SOME of the blame for his lack of success has to be laid on Rick Carlisle. I'm 100% confident that if Sarunas had as much leaway to make mistakes as Jackson or Tinsley do, he would be one of the top 5 backup point guards in the league right now, if not the starter for this team.

    What I would like to see: Give Sarunas 10 games in a row to play 20 minutes as backup point guard without pulling him every time he makes a mistake and sitting him for 5 games. If this was done, I guarantee he would thrive, especially since he's shown great chemistry with our other bench players.

    What are your thoughts?
    My opinion - Saras doesn't fit in RC schemes and maybe in Pacers team. He should have chosen other team to play for several years ago. If it lasts, he should be traded or whatever.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

    - Albert Einstein

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: RC's use of Sarunas

      Originally posted by rimock31 View Post
      So from what i've seen on other threads, it seems like we'd all agree that he's not being used properly IE: He's firstly a playmaker and floor leader and secondly a guy who can hit his shots when he's developped a rhythm.
      Bottom line, he's not a guy you can put in the game for 2 minutes and expect him to just start draining threes before breaking a sweat. I just don't understand how RC doesn't see this. Bottom line, Saras has looked amazing the past two years in the games he's played significant minutes at the point.
      For that, SOME of the blame for his lack of success has to be laid on Rick Carlisle. I'm 100% confident that if Sarunas had as much leaway to make mistakes as Jackson or Tinsley do, he would be one of the top 5 backup point guards in the league right now, if not the starter for this team.

      What I would like to see: Give Sarunas 10 games in a row to play 20 minutes as backup point guard without pulling him every time he makes a mistake and sitting him for 5 games. If this was done, I guarantee he would thrive, especially since he's shown great chemistry with our other bench players.

      What are your thoughts?
      100% Support.
      We had this threads in PD numerous times last year.
      Yours truly,
      Israfan, former Lithfan

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: RC's use of Sarunas

        The truth is somewhere in between the first two posts. Saras will have his moments if left in the game at PG. The problem is, those moments come in two vastly different forms. That's why he is most definitely not starting material in the NBA. He is too much of a liability on D and turns the ball over when asked to dribble. These shortcomings also make it questionable that he is the best choice as a backup.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: RC's use of Sarunas

          Originally posted by rimock31 View Post
          So from what i've seen on other threads, it seems like we'd all agree that he's not being used properly IE: He's firstly a playmaker and floor leader and secondly a guy who can hit his shots when he's developped a rhythm.
          Bottom line, he's not a guy you can put in the game for 2 minutes and expect him to just start draining threes before breaking a sweat. I just don't understand how RC doesn't see this. Bottom line, Saras has looked amazing the past two years in the games he's played significant minutes at the point.
          For that, SOME of the blame for his lack of success has to be laid on Rick Carlisle. I'm 100% confident that if Sarunas had as much leaway to make mistakes as Jackson or Tinsley do, he would be one of the top 5 backup point guards in the league right now, if not the starter for this team.

          What I would like to see: Give Sarunas 10 games in a row to play 20 minutes as backup point guard without pulling him every time he makes a mistake and sitting him for 5 games. If this was done, I guarantee he would thrive, especially since he's shown great chemistry with our other bench players.

          What are your thoughts?
          I agree with you, how in the hell can any player expect to succeed if he is pulled after makeing a mistake and only gets 2 minutes to get it done. How many times have we watched as Jax or Tins turn the ball over or take bad shots or don't block out or go after a rebound? I was a Rick supporter but the more that I see of his coaching it makes me wonder.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: RC's use of Sarunas

            I'm not sure Saras would produce to the level necessary to prove worthy of a significant spot in the rotation, but I agree that with the odd PT patterns an argument can be made that he's never been allowed to establish a comfort zone.

            So I'd be OK with it. Or maybe reduce it a few games if he's really struggling. And I'd honestly like to see Carlisle try a similar experiment as the season progresses with some of the other new guys. That experiment could be ongoing but stopped if a player or two did well in their stint thus earning set rotation minutes.

            It's ironic that we're still trapped in this issue of not being able to establish more definitive rotation hierachies. Depth has advantages and notable disadvantages.

            The JT and Jack factor also mucks up the works in minutes distribution b/c they are in that limbo relation to their value to the team. The fans have already ostracized them and it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall to see how they really interact with the other players. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, probably just fine. But we can't just bench one of them indefinitely if TPTB are holding out any hope of moving one or both.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: RC's use of Sarunas

              so I think we can all agree that RC is a good coach, but not the right coach for this team?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                Everyone on here agreed in the first games we used Saras the right way, and he produced greatly. After he hurt his back we are back at the situation from last year. What went wrong with the team concept the last games? And how can we get Saras back in te role from the beginning of the season?
                Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                  Originally posted by rimock31 View Post
                  What I would like to see: Give Sarunas 10 games in a row to play 20 minutes as backup point guard without pulling him every time he makes a mistake and sitting him for 5 games. If this was done, I guarantee he would thrive, especially since he's shown great chemistry with our other bench players.

                  What are your thoughts?
                  It might be worth a try, but if he fails, he should go to the IR for the rest of the season. I don't see it working. He puts too much of a burden on the other players to cover his butt. When he's out there its 4 on 5.
                  “It is what we learn after we know it all that really counts” - John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                    Cumon man, ur telling me he's that much worse of a defender than Tinsley? Have u been watching any pacers games the past few years?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                      I wish we'd trade Sarunas to another team.

                      Just for the forum's sake.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                        I could say the same thing for Tinsley, Jackson or even JO.
                        Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                          Originally posted by rimock31 View Post
                          so I think we can all agree that RC is a good coach, but not the right coach for this team?
                          No, we don't all agree to that.



                          But I can agree that the thing Sarunas does best is make Tinsley not look like the worst player on the court, at least against MIL. Both were destroyed over and over again on defense, and generally struggled to make anything happen offensively. Yet no matter how rough Tins looked, SarJas could always tweek it a little worse. It's getting really frustrating.

                          And if you are one of those people still living in the fantasy world where Sarunas only makes bad plays because he's at SG, get over it. That's not the reality this season. The other night and tonight he was filling the PG role most of the time he was out there. There were times that Armstrong swung into the SG role even with Saras bringing the ball up and running (eh, whatever you call that slop) the play.


                          Again, I'm not giving Tins a pass on this, he was only just slightly better than Sarunas. The two of them were the worst players on the court for the Pacers all night. The only thing Rick does wrong is play them, but he kinda has to considering his options at the moment.

                          I'm sure a box score only person, someone that didn't watch the game, thinks the numbers for both look fine. The problem is that Williams was able to score or create at will, as was Bell when Jack was put on Redd (which happened a lot).

                          Two of Sarunas turnovers were freaking TRAVELING.

                          Once a 4 on 2 fastbreak was coming right at him with Jack behind him, Jack was clearly screaming (and pointing though Sar could see it) for him to go to the shooter. He doesn't, he doesn't, he doesn't...so just when Jack gives up on him going out there and starts to leave the lane to cover the shooter himself, assuming now that SarJas has decided to take the ball, off goes SarJas out of the lane leaving it wide open for the layup totally undefended right as the ball gets to him, which regardless of Jack begs the question, what did Sarunas think he was doing by moving out of the way at that point? It's not like the pass had gone to the shooter. He'd already committed himself to defending the ball, the guy was right on top of him.


                          He (and Tins) did this stuff all night long. The difference is that Tinsley has actually played much better NBA basketball for entire seasons at a stretch, not just his first 2 months, so I can hold out a little hope with him. In fact I'm surprised because I think most fans thought his only problem was staying healthy. This has been the worst version of Tins we've seen yet (well, last month or so of last season was rough too).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            No, we don't all agree to that.



                            But I can agree that the thing Sarunas does best is make Tinsley not look like the worst player on the court, at least against MIL. Both were destroyed over and over again on defense, and generally struggled to make anything happen offensively. Yet no matter how rough Tins looked, SarJas could always tweek it a little worse. It's getting really frustrating.

                            And if you are one of those people still living in the fantasy world where Sarunas only makes bad plays because he's at SG, get over it. That's not the reality this season. The other night and tonight he was filling the PG role most of the time he was out there. There were times that Armstrong swung into the SG role even with Saras bringing the ball up and running (eh, whatever you call that slop) the play.


                            Again, I'm not giving Tins a pass on this, he was only just slightly better than Sarunas. The two of them were the worst players on the court for the Pacers all night. The only thing Rick does wrong is play them, but he kinda has to considering his options at the moment.

                            I'm sure a box score only person, someone that didn't watch the game, thinks the numbers for both look fine. The problem is that Williams was able to score or create at will, as was Bell when Jack was put on Redd (which happened a lot).

                            Two of Sarunas turnovers were freaking TRAVELING.

                            Once a 4 on 2 fastbreak was coming right at him with Jack behind him, Jack was clearly screaming (and pointing though Sar could see it) for him to go to the shooter. He doesn't, he doesn't, he doesn't...so just when Jack gives up on him going out there and starts to leave the lane to cover the shooter himself, assuming now that SarJas has decided to take the ball, off goes SarJas out of the lane leaving it wide open for the layup totally undefended right as the ball gets to him, which regardless of Jack begs the question, what did Sarunas think he was doing by moving out of the way at that point? It's not like the pass had gone to the shooter. He'd already committed himself to defending the ball, the guy was right on top of him.


                            He (and Tins) did this stuff all night long. The difference is that Tinsley has actually played much better NBA basketball for entire seasons at a stretch, not just his first 2 months, so I can hold out a little hope with him. In fact I'm surprised because I think most fans thought his only problem was staying healthy. This has been the worst version of Tins we've seen yet (well, last month or so of last season was rough too).
                            The most effective players right now:

                            Darrell armstrong - +37
                            Sarunas Jasikevicius - +10
                            Jermaine O'neal - + 8
                            Jeff Foster - +6

                            That means when they are on the court (I don't care with whom or against whom they play, the team plays. And Mo Williams can have 50 points over Saras and 20 assists and Saras can have 3 turnovers and miss 5 shots, but the team somehow (I don't understand that too) manages to score more than opponents while one of their player does such garbage all the time. When he's on the floor other players somehow begin to play better and compensates his all **** done by him. Other players are so kind-hearted and make a good +/- for Saras. Strange? Paradox?).

                            Least effective:

                            Jamaal Tinsley - - 75
                            Al Harrington - - 52
                            Marquis Daniels - - 49
                            Rawle Marshall - - 21

                            The best players (players played the most time and who have the best +/-):

                            Jermaine O'Neal with +8 (34,5 min)
                            (Jeff Foster with +6, but he plays only 20,4 min)
                            Danny granger with -2 (31,3 min)
                            Stephen Jackson with -13 (30,9 min)

                            The worst players:

                            Jamaal Tinsley -75 (29,6 min)
                            Al Harrington -52 (31,2 min)
                            Marquis Daniels -49 (22,5 min)

                            I don't care if Al has 30 points or Tinsley has 2/1 A/To ratio, but it means the team plays bad when they are on the floor. Paradox?

                            And I don't say that Saras plays good, but man, look at the others too, and you will see they aren't that good as you may think.

                            Basketball is not about 1 player to score 50 points. If the team loses all these points are BS. And if there is a man on the floor, who scores 6 points and does 4 turnovers, but other players respond to him better and the team plays better (maybe he is emotional leader or just does small things who makes the team better and that compensates all his ****), that's not that bad. I don't say Saras is that player on Pacers, that's just an example.
                            Everybody sees only points and turnovers. Basketball is much more. That's why USA can't win any big tournament right now. USA players are much better one-on-one players than any other world teams players, but that doesn't help much. With a bit more clever basketball they could crash every team by 30 or more points with ease.
                            "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                            - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: RC's use of Sarunas

                              I am having a hard time understanding all this animosity towards Saras. I watched the whole game last night and it seemed to me the starters were the ones who gave up the points early in the game. I noted when Saras came in we were down 15 points and when he went out the deficit was only nine. When Rick brought in Tinsley the deficit bloomed to 15 again.

                              I thought the offense seemed to flow much better with Saras in with DA. When these two play together the passing is much more frequent, better and results in dunks more often. When Tins is in its usually 1-2 passes and a shot.

                              I personally, thought Saras defense wasn't that bad. He messed up once or twice but so did the others. (Tinsley made an excellent inbounds bounce pass directly to a Bucks player. Reminded me of somebody else bouncing one off the backboard) One of his traveling calls was under the basket and if not called would have resulted in a dunk assist. I thought it was a BS call.

                              I liked the starting line up we used last night except I would start Saras in Tinsleys place.

                              I am not a coach or an expert on basketball, but I have watched enough in my life to understand some things about the game. Saras is a decent player who is in the wrong situation for him. He would have been much better for this team if they had traded JO and kept Ron. Sarunas played enough minutes last night to positively affect the outcome of the game. He doesn't deserve the verbal beating some are giving him on here today.

                              I don't mean to bash JO here because I like the hustle he is showing this year so far. Blocks are great, scoring is good, rebounds, eh, JO is doing a good job this year.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X