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

Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

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

  • #31
    Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

    Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post
    Ben Wallace is a DPOY guy and both him and Sheed were Allstars. Where do you propose we get one of these type of players?

    I don't necessarily agree that Jeff's defense was good enough to justify his anemic offense. Ben Wallace, yes. Jeff - no.
    The Pacers need a long, lean, athletic big guy - are there any in the draft. If they don't draft a point guard they are sure will be the starting point guard for the next 10 years then they better draft a long, lean athletic big guy

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

      Favors fits that bill, but he's very raw. Don't let people fool you into thinking Cousins is an explosive athlete because he is far from it - he's more of a plodding bruiser type.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        I was joking, sort of.....

        While I agree with you that his defense isn't anywhere near the level of this discussion, I will contend that given oppportunity to work on technique, he could be more than adequate to fill the role.

        Foster doesn't strike me as anything abnormal. He just doesn't possess talents that others don't, other than sheer desire. I see Jeff as exactly as what he is/was. He grew up playing guard, and then got a huge growth spurt. He has the basic fundamentals of how to move his feet playing defense through those years. Those are things that big men don't work on growing up. Most of the time, post players have always been post players. Post defense is different, obviously. Jeff has the advantage of being trained, and efficient at both.

        He's not some world beater of an athlete, he doesn't have hyper-quick feet for a big. He was just blessed to have height problems early in his career was was coached differently. (I think this has everything to do with his inability to finish inside BTW)

        To say Josh doesn't have the ability to learn those traits, is folly IMHO. Will he? Maybe not, but he does have the ability too.
        Jeff has unusually quick hands and quick feet for a guy 6'11". Not to suggest other players didn't have it, and no Jeff was never a top defender like the others I have mentioned, mainly because jeff was never a shot blocker.

        I don't think Josh will ever have some of the attirubutes that Jeff was blessed with like nose for the ball, quick hands quick feet. Josh or anyone can learn to play team defense, be in the right spots, but I don't think he'll ever be an instinctive defender - JMO

        Good thread so far.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          I am not one who believes in having a big guy to anchor the defense - at least not a big slow guy in the middle. I like big defenders who are really quick, mobile, athletic, can help recover that sort of thing.
          Dwight Howard and SVG would disagree with you, especially on this point. So would Rick Carlisle and Pat Riley (and by default Spoelstra).

          Also, we have done surprisingly well against Howard, getting him into foul trouble defensively and blocking his shots fairly frequently due to the very fact that he is slow, as you mention, due to the fact that Roy does play defense, but is mostly too slow to rotate effectively in our quicker paced game, even on defense, likely due in part to some fatigue due to having less game time conditioning during his rookie season and earlier this season as well.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

            OK. I really like that this thread has focused on perimeter defense. But honestly, when you go to a "small ball" lineup, you become completely undersized and teams will notice and take advantage of it. When you have DJones playing PF, they will post him up and his only way to prevent a basket is to foul. I have seen this quite a bit. Our second PG playing SG gets posted up by SGs with more size. Murphy is terrible in fronting a man in post defense whether matched up with a PF or C. He is either going to foul or give up an easy bucket, but then again so is everybody who tries to play against a bigger player, especially closer to the basket.

            Hibbert is still prone to fouling in general, especially on a quick move in the post. He does block a TON of shots this way though. Hibbert is not such a liability on defense because he plays the low block and also gets a lot of blocked shots. It isn't about speed with him, but moreso quickness to recover against a quick move. He does well against power moves in the post because he is so long/tall. But even then, he does get pushed around by bigger bodied centers like Bogut, Shaq, and Dwight, which causes him to foul.

            Our undersized lineup is where IMO a lot of the discrepancy in fouls commited occurs. I want to throw up when I see a box score and realize that our starting lineup was literally 4-5 from the FT line for a game. Then TJ is 8-10 from the line by himself. This shows a lack of aggressiveness and efficient ball movement. We settle for a three after two or three passes instead of making four or five passes and having the defense out of position enough to allow a more open drive to the basket. We need to force the defense to act, as opposed to taking a quick shot and not making them work defensively. I am not complaining about quick shots, but I think the FT discrepancy is a by-product of taking the three early and not forcing their defense to work/react.

            I want a PF that can play next to Hibbert. I want a defensive minded PF who blocks shots and has some size/strength. I love Hans as a backup rotational big man. This is our greatest need IMO. I prioritize defense as a coaching philosophy and this would alleviate the defensive pressure on our wings. I think our wings are very good defenders, but they are not in a position to succeed defensively. Why does Rondo look brilliant for taking so many chances defensively? He has a front court with size and the ability to block shots. The wings are good defensively, but team defense starts up front.

            I agree with UB that Jeff Foster would make a huge difference for this team. But where we might not agree is that I would have him playing next to Hibbert and have Murphy come off the bench. Murphy's offensive ability on the second team would be a bigger advantage and the backup bigs for other teams would not be able to take advantage of him as much on the defensive end. I love Murphy. I do. He just should not be a starting PF. Just like Ford is a perfect backup PG because of his fit, so is Murphy a perfect backup big man. They just get paid like starters and is their biggest downfall.

            Sorry so long.
            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Dwight Howard and SVG would disagree with you, especially on this point. So would Rick Carlisle and Pat Riley (and by default Spoelstra).

              Also, we have done surprisingly well against Howard, getting him into foul trouble defensively and blocking his shots fairly frequently due to the very fact that he is slow, as you mention, due to the fact that Roy does play defense, but is mostly too slow to rotate effectively in our quicker paced game, even on defense, likely due in part to some fatigue due to having less game time conditioning during his rookie season and earlier this season as well.
              I might not be sure exactly what you are saying here. My fault.

              But see Dwight Howard is that rare athlete that comes along about every 10 years. he is quick, athletic, big, strong - he has it all defensively. That is very rare. I love his defense.

              What I don't like is a big, strong unathletic guy who just patrols the paint. best example of that right now is Yao - I think he's liability defensively. Although he is tall, big and strong - not that he's a copmplete liability, but he can't do a lot of things I think big guys should be able to do.

              A healthy Tyson Chandler is also a huge difference maker defensively
              Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-04-2010, 12:03 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I'm sure you disagree about Roy. He's gotten better this season and I expect him to continue to improve. Now he's a good shotblocker but IMO that isn't necessarily an indication that he's a good defender. He'll always be a liability in the pick and roll coverage and other type of situations when some quickness is needed.

                I am not one who believes in having a big guy to anchor the defense - at least not a big slow guy in the middle. I like big defenders who are really quick, mobile, athletic, can help recover that sort of thing. Give me KG over a healthy Yao any day. Long, lean, quick athletic defenders is what I like. That is what made Sheed and Ben so good and to a lesser extent IMO that was what made Jeff and JO as a defensive combo very good.

                Kendrick Perkins is an interesting case. No one guards Dwight Howard any better (and that alone gives the Celtics a decent chance of beating the Magic). Perk is physical a bit of a bruiser, and not the most athletic guy, but he doesn't seem slow in his lateral quickness - so he is an excellent defender.
                Let's test this theory a little here by comparing two players who played at the same time, who played the same position, who both were good defenders (IMO anyway) but were totally differant.

                Dale Davis vs. Charles Oakley.

                Dale would be your fast, lean, long athletic player.

                Charles would be your slower, bulkier and craftier player.

                Uncle Buck break down both of these types of players for me and tell me which you would prefer given our current team.

                BTW, to your suprise I don't disagree with you about Roy on defense. I think Foster would have been perfect with him.

                That is why I really hope that Tyler can come around next year. I also like Josh next to him.


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

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                  Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                  Dwight Howard and SVG would disagree with you, especially on this point. So would Rick Carlisle and Pat Riley (and by default Spoelstra).
                  In case you haven't seen it from our previous debates, UncleBuck likes giving up layups that occur on the next pass after the pick-and-roll because his post presence is out of position, and he prefers to cover the interior with zone and double-teams instead of man-to-man defense.

                  Clearly (IMO, of course) the best choice is always to have an interior post defender that eats up all the space and makes it impossible for the ball to penetrate into the paint, period.

                  You don't take a great post presence and have them switch on the pick-and-roll. Only Jim O'Brien would do that.

                  UncleBuck doesn't consider Shaq the greatest defensive Presence of the past twenty years (we've had that debate). If we each had the #1 pick in the hypothetical draft from the cumulative all-time roster for a defensive team, I'd take either Shaq, Wilt or Russell to own the paint and he'd take someone like Jeff Foster to front the post or Kevin Garnett to switch on the pick-and-roll.

                  As silly as I think it is (and most successful NBA coaches seem to agree), UncleBuck does not value post defense.

                  But he has a point - the number of outstanding post defenders has been on the decline for a long time now (and was already on the decline during the 1990s even when Shaq, Patrick, Dale Davis, Hakeem, Alonzo and a few other players still ruled the paint.) So its harder and harder to find a good post presence and coaches, by necessity, have found ways ("Gimmicks") to overcome this void -- with varying levels of success.

                  However, that is a void that every team should be trying to fill instead of Gimmick their way around. Perhaps Roy can continue to grow into that type of post defender.

                  That would be much better for the Pacers' long-term fortunes than to give up on him because he doesn't have the lateral quickness to switch on the pick-and-roll.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I might not be sure exactly what you are saying here. My fault.

                    But see Dwight Howard is that rare athlete that comes along about every 10 years. he is quick, athletic, big, strong - he has it all defensively. That is very rare. I love his defense.

                    What I don't like is a big, strong unathletic guy who just patrols the paint. best example of that right now is Yao - I think he's liability defensively. Although he is tall, big and strong - not that he's a copmplete liability, but he can't do a lot of things I think big guys should be able to do.

                    A healthy Tyson Chandler is also a huge difference maker defensively
                    Howard is big, athletic, and very very VERY strong and is a shot blocker.

                    What he is not, IMO, is quick, which is why Roy has had at least a measure of success against him on both ends of the floor, and is also why O'B gave Roy minutes against him. He considered Roy to be a better matchup against Howard due to quickness, and that matchup was also a factor in our totally surprising victory against them on January 5, and had us neck and neck with them during games last year when we had little right to expect it whether it was a much quicker Foster or Roy playing against him.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      Let's test this theory a little here by comparing two players who played at the same time, who played the same position, who both were good defenders (IMO anyway) but were totally differant.

                      Dale Davis vs. Charles Oakley.

                      Dale would be your fast, lean, long athletic player.

                      Charles would be your slower, bulkier and craftier player.
                      Wow. I don't agree with that assesment of Dale at all. You've just compared Foster with either Oak or Dale. Not Oak vs. Dale.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                        It's simple. The defense is bad and out of place. Most of the Pacers foul attempts take place during drives to the basket or inside, b/c we're normally out matched... which leads to FTAs.

                        Our PGs usually can't keep there man in front of them which leads to them committing a foul out of position, or a drive that cause a big or the help defender to foul the PG or the player the assist goes to.

                        The Pacers commit dumb reach in fouls or "hacking" type of fouls because they're outmatched, we causes a team to get into the penalty early, which leads to even more FTAs since the Pacers foul a lot anyways.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          In case you haven't seen it from our previous debates, UncleBuck likes giving up layups that occur on the next pass after the pick-and-roll because his post presence is out of position, and he prefers to cover the interior with zone and double-teams instead of man-to-man defense.

                          Clearly (IMO, of course) the best choice is always to have an interior post defender that eats up all the space and makes it impossible for the ball to penetrate into the paint, period.

                          You don't take a great post presence and have them switch on the pick-and-roll. Only Jim O'Brien would do that.

                          UncleBuck doesn't consider Shaq the greatest defensive Presence of the past twenty years (we've had that debate). If we each had the #1 pick in the hypothetical draft from the cumulative all-time roster for a defensive team, I'd take either Shaq, Wilt or Russell to own the paint and he'd take someone like Jeff Foster to front the post or Kevin Garnett to switch on the pick-and-roll.

                          As silly as I think it is (and most successful NBA coaches seem to agree), UncleBuck does not value post defense.

                          But he has a point - the number of outstanding post defenders has been on the decline for a long time now (and was already on the decline during the 1990s even when Shaq, Patrick, Dale Davis, Hakeem, Alonzo and a few other players still ruled the paint.) So its harder and harder to find a good post presence and coaches, by necessity, have found ways ("Gimmicks") to overcome this void -- with varying levels of success.

                          However, that is a void that every team should be trying to fill instead of Gimmick their way around. Perhaps Roy can continue to grow into that type of post defender.

                          That would be much better for the Pacers' long-term fortunes than to give up on him because he doesn't have the lateral quickness to switch on the pick-and-roll.
                          Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                          Gotcha!!!!!!!

                          You just put Dale in Shaq's, Hakeem & Zo's teritory. So therefor by stating this you are now admitting that Dale was an elite post defender thus making your Tony is as good as Dale remarks null and void.


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

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            Wow. I don't agree with that assesment of Dale at all. You've just compared Foster with either Oak or Dale. Not Oak vs. Dale.
                            Really???

                            In what way? This has me perplexed.


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

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              do we really want to get onto that tangent. Yes Josh is the "type" of defender I would like and should like. But he looks lost defensively most of the time. Comparing him to Jeff Foster - Josh doesn't have good lateral quickness, doesn't have quick hands or feet. I don't see any instincts there to play defense well. He can jump though so he has that going for him - but other than good jumping ability I don't know what else he has.
                              Josh has excellent lateral quickness are you even watching the same player? I have seen him switch on to small forwards numerous times and hold his own. The game where he switched onto corey maggete and blocked his shot on back to back possesesions comes to mind. Not coming from the weakside mind you, blocked it right in his face after stopping the drive.

                              Josh struggles in the low post at times, but he can stay in front of almost anyone.
                              Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 03-04-2010, 01:34 PM.
                              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                              - ilive4sports

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Why do the Pacers give up so many FTAs?

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Let's test this theory a little here by comparing two players who played at the same time, who played the same position, who both were good defenders (IMO anyway) but were totally differant.

                                Dale Davis vs. Charles Oakley.

                                Dale would be your fast, lean, long athletic player.

                                Charles would be your slower, bulkier and craftier player.

                                Uncle Buck break down both of these types of players for me and tell me which you would prefer given our current team.

                                BTW, to your suprise I don't disagree with you about Roy on defense. I think Foster would have been perfect with him.

                                That is why I really hope that Tyler can come around next year. I also like Josh next to him.
                                First, as you know the NBA was entirely different back in the 90's than it is today. Oakley could not do 90% of the thing he tried back in the day. He would be much less effective defensively today. I think Dale was always a better defender - but if both were to play now Dale would even be that much better than Oak. Oak wasn't as slow as it appeared at times though.

                                an aside, I admired the way oakley played efense though. I'll never forget him hipchecking Reggie out of bounds or taking an extremely hard foul after the whistle would blow.
                                Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-04-2010, 01:40 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X