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

Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

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

  • #31
    Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

    Rasho's also a better passer than Jeff.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

      Originally posted by Jim R View Post
      Show me a team which won a championship without a true low post presence in the last 50 years, and I'll show you a team which played great defense. Not to say those teams with a low post presence didn't also play great defense, but Pistons teams and Bulls teams were great defensive teams. In the case of the Bulls, they had Jordan.
      Why can't Hibbert eventually be that Low-Post scoring threat?

      Originally posted by Jim R View Post
      I'm not sure the Pacers have any of those ingredients right now. I would mold this team after the Pacers' teams which made the finals or even the conference finals. A low post threat is pretty appealing, and as exciting as JOB's offense is, the last I checked the Phoenix just scrapped the entire system with much talent than the Pacers have had in the last four years.
      Well......I agree with you on the notion that the way this offense is run that I feel that it could get us back to the Playoffs but won't really sustain us for a deep Playoff run....but that's something that you would have to take up with Bird and JO'B. Given the likelihood of having JO'B around for another season or two....my guess is that we won't be seeing a change of offense/defense to the half-court offense that I'm guessing that you are suggesting.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

        While I don't like the Larry Brown rookies-ride-the-pine method, I'm not so sure you build a rookie's confidence by throwing them into the deep end against starters and letting them get taken apart. I mean, we're not talking Shaq/LeBron/Wade level guys here.

        Seems to me that getting the bulk of the bench minutes at their positions will do plenty to develop their contributions and confidence.

        This may be a year destined for mediocrity, but we need to win some games in order to rebuild the confidence of the fan base. That probably means at least winning more games than last year, probably a first-round-and-out, but it is a visible improvement to the community.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

          Jim R,

          Execellent points. I agree 100% with your original comments and your arguments in support of this.

          What happens this season can have a huge impact on the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons. Getting Hibbert and Rush into the starting lineup - letting them learn to play the NBA game during actual games against first-string competition is vital. This is not a win-now team and the team is unlikely to make the playoffs, no matter who plays the most minutes. Therefore, the viewpoint MUST be long-term, even if Roy and Brandon hit a few bumps in the road this season they need a coach committed to keeping them on the court, learning, and developing.

          If these are not the two young men to add to Granger to build around, then we need to determine that immediately and try again next summer.

          It seems to me that both young men are mature enough to handle whatever adversity might be coming thier way. I wouldn't want to take this strategy with an early-entry guy that only played one season of college ball and is supremely immature.

          This season in isolation (like it or not) is a throw-away. But it can be the foundation of bigger things to come and I believe the fan base will recognize the small steps of improvement and gradually get on board.

          EDIT - by the way, if you shelter a rookie from the 'rookie wall' by limiting thier minutes, then you just postpone that situation until the following year. We call it the "sophomore slump". The 'rookie wall' isn't something you back away from, it is a necessary part of a young player's learning curve.
          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


          • #35
            Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

            If this season is inded a "throw-away" season, then I would state that the primary goal is to be as good as we are capable of being at the end of the season.

            If that is the case, then I would agree that an important part of the Pacer future would be in evaluating and developing our youngsters as much as possible.

            However, I think that we are forced to also look at our season from a different perspective. Bird has made significant strides in ridding the roster of players that have been percieved as "driving fans away". One more trade, and in my book he will have achieved perfection in that department.

            This has been primarily to put fans back into the seats. But bringing back fans, as we know, goes further than that. We must be consistently competitive, and of course winning more games would also be nice.

            The foremost thing to remember is that the Pacers are a business. Their profit is determined in large part by player salaries and by the number of fans that are the seats.

            So, there is a pretty delicate balance between preparing young players for the future and possibly sacrificing a few wins, and doing whatever is necessary to maximize the number of wins this season.

            From my perspective, I believe that the Pacers present situation with their fans is such that maximizing competitiveness and number of wins is of primary important now that the roster has been overhauled.

            For that reason, barring injuries, I don't see any of our youngsters getting significant minutes in the first couple of months of the season.

            Through Christmas, I believe Hibbert might average 12-15 minutes and Rush maybe as much as 15-18 minutes per game.

            Starting in January, it might then be possible to find more minutes for them.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              While I don't like the Larry Brown rookies-ride-the-pine method, I'm not so sure you build a rookie's confidence by throwing them into the deep end against starters and letting them get taken apart. I mean, we're not talking Shaq/LeBron/Wade level guys here.

              Seems to me that getting the bulk of the bench minutes at their positions will do plenty to develop their contributions and confidence.

              This may be a year destined for mediocrity, but we need to win some games in order to rebuild the confidence of the fan base. That probably means at least winning more games than last year, probably a first-round-and-out, but it is a visible improvement to the community.
              This is an excellent point. Not every player develops best in the same way. It does seem likely that Rush and Hibbert have the temperament to deal with the certain failures associated with the experiment proposed, but this is definitely not a wise approach in all cases. Some players should be brought along slowly. I would wonder if Jamaal Tinsley had been spoon fed early in his career, made to apprentice for a year or two, if he wouldn't have been a different player.

              While I ardently hope that Rush and Hibbert see regular, sustained playing time, and would be thrilled if one of the two ended up in the starting lineup by year's end, I would prefer that they earn it. The problem I have with the OP's thrust is that I consider it to be a different vein of the same "confusing activity with accomplishment" type strategies that had been employed up until this offseason.

              Since the brawl, the Pacers have kept doing things in hopes that it would make things better: trade Artest for Peja, let Peja walk, but snare a TE, use the TE & a first for Al, Trade Al & Jax for Murphleavy & Ike, Fire Carlisle, Hire O'Brien, all peppered with small AJ/Austin type deals. There was no coherence to the approach, and the team lurched around like a drunk who couldn't remember where he put his keys.

              While this proposal does at least have an eye towards the future, and therefore, some sense of direction, I still think that it may be shortcutting things too much for my taste. I do believe that Bird does view Brandon Rush as the future starting 2, and Roy as the future starting 5. However, I would prefer that we figure out the best way to get there from where we are now rather than just plugging them in and letting them sink or swim.

              The other thing that I find troublesome in this thread is the idea of using assets to get a "stud PF". While I agree that there are holes in the structure of this team, and I recognize that we will probably have to part with some valued assets to fill them, I get heartburn when I see this idea thrown around so cavalierly. It's kind of the "then a miracle occurs" strategy. We talk about what we need in broad terms, but we never identify who can fill that role, or how practical it is to get them.

              I consider this summer to be a good start because of the following:

              - We significantly improved our financial flexibility and position.
              - We added four young players (Ford, Rush, Hibbert, and Jack) that can reasonably be considered to likely pieces of the future foundation.
              - We are in the process of severing the ties (at least symbolically) to the past few years with the trades of JO and Shawne, and whatever upcoming Tinsley deal occurs.

              This is going to be an evolution, not a revolution. I would certainly consider a year where Rush and Hibbert ride the pine in favor of short rotations including Rasho, Croshere, Foster, & Daniels a disappointment and alarming failure. However, I cannot say definitively that throwing Rush & Hibbert out there would be the right thing to do.

              I would consider it to be an unqualified success if Hibbert could play the same kind of role Reggie did as a rookie: 20+min per game as THE backup, clearly being groomed to replace the veteran starter. Rush is more difficult to judge because of the presence of Granger, Dunleavy, and Jack, but I am hopeful he can average 15-20 minutes a night, occasionally playing down the stretch as the guy with the hot hand.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                This may be a year destined for mediocrity, but we need to win some games in order to rebuild the confidence of the fan base. That probably means at least winning more games than last year, probably a first-round-and-out, but it is a visible improvement to the community.
                Mediocrity is better than sucking.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                  Originally posted by count55 View Post
                  While I ardently hope that Rush and Hibbert see regular, sustained playing time, and would be thrilled if one of the two ended up in the starting lineup by year's end, I would prefer that they earn it.
                  Absolutely. We complain about an entitlement mentality, but that's what you get if you start an inferior player over a superior one.

                  If Hibby wants to start over Rasho he needs to be a better player than Rasho.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                    Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                    Mediocrity is better than sucking.
                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Absolutely. We complain about an entitlement mentality, but that's what you get if you start an inferior player over a superior one.

                    If Hibby wants to start over Rasho he needs to be a better player than Rasho.
                    Never let a vision for the future get in the way of the almighty "play 0.500 and hope for a #8 spot" approach.

                    - - - - - - - - - -

                    You guys realize that Donnie Walsh is running the Knicks now, right? All of Donnie's strategy can be thrown out the window.

                    Bird may or may not be smart enough to do the job, but he doesn't strike me as being interested in having a 0.500 team barely make the playoffs unless it is a team on the rise.
                    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


                    • #40
                      Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      Never let a vision for the future get in the way of the almight "play 0.500 and hope for a #8 spot" approach.
                      I think that is what we should expect. To expand on what beast23 alluded to.....Bird is on a mission to bring the fans back to Conseco Fieldhouse by focusing on winning now and returning to the Playoffs. My wish is that we can win games by playing Hibbert and Rush as much as possible.....but realistically, my guess is that more often then not.....winning games will mean that they won't be getting as many minutes as we hope.

                      Right now, Bird thinks that winning games....despite the liklihood that we would still end up in 8th place in the East....is far more important then trying to develop Hibbert and Rush. Although this mentality is only looking down the road for 1-2 seasons.......if we can't bring in the fans by winning now....there won't be a reason to look to the future.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                        I think Bird the salesman is trying to get fans back in any way possible. I think Bird the Team President cares far less about this seasons' W/L record and more about making progress with his new players.

                        He clearly can't come out and say, "we're gonna suck this year, but buy tickets anyway."

                        I think some people are putting too much stock in Bird-in-the-role-of-season-ticket-saleman's words. I think he hates mediocrity far more than he hates losing-with-a-plan.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          Jim R,

                          Execellent points. I agree 100% with your original comments and your arguments in support of this.

                          What happens this season can have a huge impact on the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons. Getting Hibbert and Rush into the starting lineup - letting them learn to play the NBA game during actual games against first-string competition is vital. This is not a win-now team and the team is unlikely to make the playoffs, no matter who plays the most minutes. Therefore, the viewpoint MUST be long-term, even if Roy and Brandon hit a few bumps in the road this season they need a coach committed to keeping them on the court, learning, and developing.

                          If these are not the two young men to add to Granger to build around, then we need to determine that immediately and try again next summer.

                          It seems to me that both young men are mature enough to handle whatever adversity might be coming thier way. I wouldn't want to take this strategy with an early-entry guy that only played one season of college ball and is supremely immature.

                          This season in isolation (like it or not) is a throw-away. But it can be the foundation of bigger things to come and I believe the fan base will recognize the small steps of improvement and gradually get on board.

                          EDIT - by the way, if you shelter a rookie from the 'rookie wall' by limiting thier minutes, then you just postpone that situation until the following year. We call it the "sophomore slump". The 'rookie wall' isn't something you back away from, it is a necessary part of a young player's learning curve.
                          Amazingly I mostly agree with you. I'm trying to figure when the last time that happened was. As far as Hibbert starting, I don't think it necessarily makes a difference if he starts, but rather the playing time he gets. And certinaly, he needs playing time against the starters of the opposing team.
                          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                            Because Pacer Nation has a severe case of myopia, the best thing that could happen to this franchise is for the anticipated lineup of Ford-Dun-Granger-Murphy/Foster-Rasho to lay a rotten egg during November so that the fans get restless to see Rush and Hibbert. I believe that by April the lineup of PG-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Hibbert will be best lineup we can put on the court and the best chance of winning 30+ games this season.
                            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


                            • #44
                              Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              Because Pacer Nation has a severe case of myopia, the best thing that could happen to this franchise is for the anticipated lineup of Ford-Dun-Granger-Murphy/Foster-Rasho to lay a rotten egg during November so that the fans get restless to see Rush and Hibbert. I believe that by April the lineup of PG-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Hibbert will be best lineup we can put on the court and the best chance of winning 30+ games this season.
                              I still disagree. I think it would be best for both of our rookies to come off the bench. Someone stated before that they aren't ready to take on other starters. I feel that maybe that for the remaining preseason games we try that approach, and see where it gets us. Obviously, without our core we cannot get far, but I really feel that we need to re-think this whole starting the rookies thing for now.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Hibbert needs to start, and Rush needs lots of PT...

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                Absolutely. We complain about an entitlement mentality, but that's what you get if you start an inferior player over a superior one.

                                If Hibby wants to start over Rasho he needs to be a better player than Rasho.
                                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                                Never let a vision for the future get in the way of the almighty "play 0.500 and hope for a #8 spot" approach.

                                - - - - - - - - - -

                                You guys realize that Donnie Walsh is running the Knicks now, right? All of Donnie's strategy can be thrown out the window.

                                Bird may or may not be smart enough to do the job, but he doesn't strike me as being interested in having a 0.500 team barely make the playoffs unless it is a team on the rise.
                                That's not what either of us are saying. We are not talking about wins or losses, but a player actually proving that he belongs on the floor. The question is "does this player deserve playing time?", not "Can this player help me win today?" The first question should always be asked. The second question should only be asked when the team is at a sufficiently high level of competitiveness/competition.

                                Taking it further, I also have concerns about putting the player on the floor with at least the opportunity to succeed. Yes, the player can learn from failure, but failure without the chance of success will be costly, and I'm talking about the player, not the team.

                                I cannot speak for Anthem, but I would tend to factor a player's development into whether I consider him to be inferior/superior. As an example, I might consider Marquis a better NBA player than Brandon today. However, if I look at the two, and I can see how Brandon is currently closing the gap and will eventually overtake him, then I would consider Brandon the "superior" player, despite fact that it might not be true today.

                                This came up in the conversation I had with rexnom...we should start and maintain a meritocracy, but, as you note, it should involve the "vision" of what the players will be. It is not a strict interpretation of the narrow world of "today".

                                My objection to the "throw 'em in" plan is two-fold: 1st - the negatives of entitlement, and 2nd - the question as to whether that approach is the best way to maximize the development of that particular player. Overall, I'm less concerned with what this would do to our Win/Loss record, and more concerned with what this could do to both the player and the culture of the team.

                                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                                I think Bird the salesman is trying to get fans back in any way possible. I think Bird the Team President cares far less about this seasons' W/L record and more about making progress with his new players.

                                He clearly can't come out and say, "we're gonna suck this year, but buy tickets anyway."

                                I think some people are putting too much stock in Bird-in-the-role-of-season-ticket-saleman's words. I think he hates mediocrity far more than he hates losing-with-a-plan.
                                I think this is a fair and accurate assessment.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X