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

Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

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

  • #31
    Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

    Granger get lost on defense - he gets backdoored a lot, several times today, he is often out of position. His problem is not defensive talent because he can play one-on-one defense very well - but in the team concept he is either thinking too much and therefore is always a step late or he isn't thinking at all.
    Exactly. I have lots of hope for him. I mean I'd be shocked if that doesn't change as he learns the game. He just had a set of offensive "I get it" moments this year IMO which has made that end of the court a lot better for him.

    And the only reason I get on the topic so much is because people think he is a stopper still. That was the first identity he latched onto LAST YEAR, but that focus changed.

    I'm one in the "Pippen-like" camp and nothing this year has made me feel different about that.

    Originally posted by JayRedd
    Danny Granger has great bball instincts, but thinks too much while he's out there. I've been waiting for over 100 games now for that deer-in-the-headlights look to disappear forever. Still waiting....
    I think he lost that look on offense. He just about found his way into an offensive role since going to the bench. He varies his shots now and goes into plays with confidence. Eventually I think he'll start reading the defensive end the same way.



    I was so busy when I got home that I didn't get to look at the actual box and shot chart till now. If you want to really make yourself ill then go look at the shot chart for the 2nd half, specifically the shots missed by the Pacers IN THE PAINT.

    That's where they lost it.

    The box also reminded me that I was saying to Gnome for most of the game that Tinsley even beats out Jeff as the player most likely to miss a GOOD LOOK in the paint. All game he just couldn't get shots at the rim to fall.

    Oh, and that transition offense

    Funny thing is I've been noting how strong the transition DEFENSE is and this game was another example of that. They turned the Jazz away on several breaks in impressive fashion. I guess they learn how to stop them from what teams do when they break.

    Anyway, the paint misses and some of the defensive numbers just reminds me how winnable the game was all over again, despite constantly trailing.

    If Jack doesn't commit that silly foul on the break that Tins made and then if Jack hits that wide open layup, that game is 2 points with 1 minute to go or something like that.


    This game was going to be my guage for where the team is at, but instead I had to leave just as confused. It was a close game in the end against a very good Utah team and despite some really horrible shooting from the Pacers (lots of open looks missed, it wasn't just Utah defense) so it sort of says "hey, coming along".

    But on the other hand it got ugly at times and they spent the whole game fighting uphill. It really reminded me of the home opener last year vs Philly where they had constant chances to really get close with good stops, but then kept blowing things at the other end unforced. In that game they also spent most of the 2nd trying to get back within 10 only to make a late game surge to get really close before losing.

    That turned out to be a bit of an indicator on the season even prior to Ron asking out. Impressive (like CLE on T'giving) but then massively disappointing (ATL, MIL losses).

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

      Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
      Can we lay off the scapegoats for now please. I swear here are people here that would bash our players even if we one the title, then there are people who think choosing the popular scapegoat makes them look smart. I didn't even see this game but sounds like the team had a chance to beat statisticly the best team in the league. How can someone blame Jack when Tinsley shot 3 for 18. I won't blame anyone for there perfomance in a game I didn't see but you people **** me off.
      IRONY ALERT.

      Hands up, who thinks I'm anti-Jackson? Now, hands up who thinks I'm up his rear and constantly defending him?

      I did see the game btw, but thanks for the the hate on the issue. I love being the a-hole that apparently is bashing Jackson when about 18 hours ago I was the a-hole that thought he could do no wrong.

      Pick a freaking side against me at least. Just make sure it's not the one where I hate ANY player if you want to have any shot at being correct. I'd say I was one of the few, maybe only, people at the PD party that didn't have at least one Pacer I didn't care for.


      Tinsley did shoot poorly, but it was Jack that let Fisher torch him for 3 straight makes in the early 3rd when the lead shot up, and then Jack blew a play the other way in that mix too. Terrible stretch for him and it was when the lead went from 10 back up to 14 IIRC.

      Jack in general had one of his worst defensive games of the year IMO. This game was classic Jack, some good stretches and then some train wrecks. In this case his bad portions came at some of the worst possible moments. That's what I mean be "blowing the game". For all the bad shooting, play, etc they had a chance to win and at those crucial moments he stunk.


      For those that didn't see the game, check the play by play. In the 4th at the 4:48 mark Tinsley stole the ball. He was out in front and did go on to make the layup. Jack was trailing, didn't touch the ball, and then just ran over AK for a charge AWAY FROM THE PLAY that cost them the Tinsley made layup that would have cut it to 10 with nearly 5 minutes left.

      The other is from 9 to 7 in the 3rd you see the Fisher makes...those were all plays that Jack did get flat-out beat by Fisher on. And in the mix he missed a 3 and a layup. At that point the game easily could have gone from 10 to 4 points perhaps, certainly 6, but instead went to 14. Then they had to go back to grinding their way into it.

      And then his missed layup that would have cut it to 4 with 58 seconds left. A layup.

      DA was absolutely awesome. The only guy that gave consistent defensive effort while on the floor I thought.
      Seriously, did you see any of his 3pt shots??? 2 of them at least didn't even get within 2 feet of the rim, and I mean wide left and right. One hit the SIDE OF THE BACKBOARD, and not from the baseline but from the 3/4 spot.

      It was so bad that Jack and DA LAUGHED about it (end of half IIRC). I don't mean they didn't care and I didn't mind them doing that, I thought it was warranted becasue the shot was laughably bad.

      It wasn't as funny when he did it a couple of more times. When he finally did make his 1 3 it felt akin to a X-mas miracle. Dude was 1-6 from 3 and I think 2-6 on hitting the rim from 3. Yikes.

      He did look good on his double teaming but on the ball he still gambles and gets beat quite a bit. IMO he's trying to compensate for a lack of speed (comparatively to younger small PGs).


      Even when they were down by 20 I thought that they were still fighting and showing some pride. I wouldn't call this a blowout but just a bad game against a very good team.
      I kept saying to RG that "if they just get it to 10 by 9 minutes" and then "if they just get it to 6 by 3 minutes"...

      Even with the tough opening 4 minutes I said "if the pull this back close in the next 4-5 minutes it really won't be a "slow start", it will just be a small run that's typical in games. Sure enough they did close the gap. Definitely a game they stayed in even when it ebbed away from them.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        I think you are way underestimating the Jazz. They are extremely aggressive, they execute their offense to perfection (that doesn't mean you make every shot though) they are disciplined, they are unselfish, they play with constant and consistant effort. I could go on and on. Certainly they aren't the most talented team in the NBA - they don't dazzle you with great athleticism or great one-on-one play - but they certainly play the right way
        I 100% agree UB which is probably why I am not bouncing off the walls that we lost in this fashion. Utah may have not played their best game, but we played much, much worse. I mean we just aren't gonna win many games when Al doesn't score 10+ let alone zero. I am looking at the positives from this game which is essentially I don't feel we ever really gave up and I thought JO and DA provided fantastic leadership. We have three very, very winnable games coming up. Gotta take care of business.


        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Watching the Jazz in person is fun. Some of you may want to know what I mean when I say the Jazz are probably the best coached team in the NBA (Jazz and Spurs) what are the earmarks of a well coached team. The Jazz players know exactly what they are supposed to do - there is hardly any indecision - there aren't any questions about "what are we supposed to do now"

          Certainly the coach is vital in having a well coached team - but you need the right players also. The Jazz have smart veteran players who know but also accept their roles. Spurs have the same thing. During Rick's first season as the Pistons head coach I often described that team as the best coached team in the NBA. Also don't think if Sloan or Popovich were the pacers coach that they would then be the best coached team in the NBA
          All the FRONT LINE movement. To start the game I said to RG "man, we are going to get punished on the PnR with Williams/Boozer". Then they almost never ran PG PnR. It was all 2 bigs, and the entire front line screening for each other, weaving, give and gos (between BIGS!), curls off each other, all sorts of stuff.

          AK had the ball in his hands the instant Williams fouled out which was consistant with the rest of the game. The shots they dropped were almost always well earned in-the-flow shots. Ignoring the focus on the frontline aspect, this team's offense looked as fundamentally sound as the 2000 Pacers. Seriously.

          Like Buck I often found myself complementing the Jazz plays, even when they didn't work. I'd pay to watch them play again, that's for sure.

          I think the first play of the game for them involved a weaving 3 man game that intentionally ended with Okur rolling off a lane screen to drift out to the arc for the return pass and a set shot 3, which of course he can drop.

          Keep in mind that 2 of the bigs are Euros (AK, Okur), all 3 have good jump shot range. Boozer hit 2 beautiful long elbow jumpers in the 3rd, and they were over JO rather than just open due to bad defense. 4 of Okur's 6 makes were long jump shots.

          Originally posted by Calgary Jazz View Post
          This is probably the best team we've played all year," said Jermaine O'Neal, who led Indiana with 31 points. "And they really showed why they're the best team in the NBA, because no matter what happens, they don't show very many emotions. They just come out with their hard hat and just play basketball, no matter what."

          Nice words by O'Neal. I do not think the Jazz are the best team, they are good but still to young and inexperienced to be considered as a contenders. Spurs and Dallas are still the best teams in the West, if Jazz somehow will make it to the second round of playoffs I will be more than happy.
          Next year on the other hand baring any major changes they should compete for Western conference title.
          But Indy has yet to face the Spurs, Mavs and Suns yet, so what he said is true. I certainly noticed the level of play difference. It was much better than even the Lakers under Phil Jackson and the Skiles' Bulls.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

            Is anyone going to say that we played horribly against a very good team and were still sort of in it at the end? Doesn't that deserve some props? Also, JO was getting touches but simply passing out when he couldn't take the double team on. He's been playing excellent ball of late. Like 03-04 ball. Though I don't remember him being this beastly on D.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

              Originally posted by able View Post
              Sara had some good and some horrendous moments, and should stop trying to be fancy with every pass, most of them are only passes because receiving players go out of their way to catch it, but it is not the road to success.
              well, even more food for "these guys are still too bad to catch Saras passes" jokes here. good to know!

              seriously though, I'd rather see him do the things that help the team win. tonight they lost, so there's nothing positive to take out of this no matter how many assists or points did Saras or anyone else make.. I guess your thoughts are spot on here (he should stop doing what results in turnovers).
              on the other hand, it has been written time and time again that Saras made his name in the World on fancy, "no-look" passes. that (among other things) actually led to some huge successes over the years. that's his style, his trademark. he does it like noone else in the International arena. now good players are immitating that, but he's the original.. sure, one may presume that if the No. 1 PG in the team has a different style of passing, the players might have problems adjusting to to a backup with a more advanced (and rather unique, in a way) style

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                IRONY ALERT.



                Seriously, did you see any of his 3pt shots??? 2 of them at least didn't even get within 2 feet of the rim, and I mean wide left and right. One hit the SIDE OF THE BACKBOARD, and not from the baseline but from the 3/4 spot.

                It was so bad that Jack and DA LAUGHED about it (end of half IIRC). I don't mean they didn't care and I didn't mind them doing that, I thought it was warranted becasue the shot was laughably bad.

                It wasn't as funny when he did it a couple of more times. When he finally did make his 1 3 it felt akin to a X-mas miracle. Dude was 1-6 from 3 and I think 2-6 on hitting the rim from 3. Yikes.

                He did look good on his double teaming but on the ball he still gambles and gets beat quite a bit. IMO he's trying to compensate for a lack of speed (comparatively to younger small PGs).

                As a matter of fact, I did see DA's poor shooting. True at least two of his 3s essentially didn't draw iron. However, all his shots were open looks either in the flow of the offense or with the shot clock down. Unlike Tins who repeatedly forced shot after mostly unmakeable shot under heavy pressure.

                My comment completely responded to DA's D and intensity in what for him was a significant number of minutes. So while he did not shoot well, I also observed that he was the key energy player whose presence just so coincided with the majority of our runs that significantly reduced their lead.

                Most important were his intensity and composure when almost nobody else outside JO looked like they came ready to compete against a top tier team for 48 minutes. In the context of this particular game, he was our best chance to win from the standpoint of runnning and leading the team. He may be old but at least he gives effort whereas I don't think Tins managed to go over or successfully fight through one screen all night.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                  Originally posted by Kestas View Post
                  well, even more food for "these guys are still too bad to catch Saras passes" jokes here. good to know!

                  seriously though, I'd rather see him do the things that help the team win. tonight they lost, so there's nothing positive to take out of this no matter how many assists or points did Saras or anyone else make.. I guess your thoughts are spot on here (he should stop doing what results in turnovers).
                  on the other hand, it has been written time and time again that Saras made his name in the World on fancy, "no-look" passes. that (among other things) actually led to some huge successes over the years. that's his style, his trademark. he does it like noone else in the International arena. now good players are immitating that, but he's the original.. sure, one may presume that if the No. 1 PG in the team has a different style of passing, the players might have problems adjusting to to a backup with a more advanced (and rather unique, in a way) style
                  I have no objection to "look-away-passes" in any way, however I object to passes thrown where the receiver has to step back, jump in the air or dive out of bounds to get the pass, not to mention the pass where he drove in the lane, went up, couldn't get there, looked away and threw the ball at JO's knees, expecting JO to come back up with the ball, had he dumped it into his hands, perfect, a little above, great, a little below, ok, but at his knees?

                  it is those kind of passes that become turnovers, and those he should not throw, or look and make sure the ball comes in the receiver's comfortzone, that's the hallmark of a good PG, delivering a ball in the "comfortzone" of the recipient.
                  So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                  If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                  Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I think you are way underestimating the Jazz. They are extremely aggressive, they execute their offense to perfection (that doesn't mean you make every shot though) they are disciplined, they are unselfish, they play with constant and consistant effort. I could go on and on. Certainly they aren't the most talented team in the NBA - they don't dazzle you with great athleticism or great one-on-one play - but they certainly play the right way
                    I'm not saying they aren't a good team, I just feel like any time you get up by 21 points and don't put the game away, it isn't a GREAT effort or executed perfectly...They were certainly the better team last night, and they are definitely a better team than the Pacers.

                    They DID get up by 21 points, so there was a good amount of effort put forth. If we had a 21 point lead on someone and let it become a 2 possession game late in the fourth, I wouldn't characterize our performance as great either....That was all I was saying.

                    Even with their 21 point lead, our inferior, outplayed team managed to get back in it with lackluster performances by everyone but two. I wouldn't call that a great performance, or a great team. They are beatable, and should've been beaten last night.



                    RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                      Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                      Please give me an example of the last time you have made a positive post. If Jackson made the last second winner in a title game, I would expect you to be here talking about how he should have passed it, while demanding a trade.
                      It's interesting that someone who rants about how the whole board pisses him off would demand proof of positive posts.

                      I've been around here for ten years, and you've got 75 posts worth of experience to assess my attitude.

                      For the record, check out the last thread I started and you'll find it to be quite positive.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                        Originally posted by Kestas View Post
                        well, even more food for "these guys are still too bad to catch Saras passes" jokes here. good to know!

                        seriously though, I'd rather see him do the things that help the team win. tonight they lost, so there's nothing positive to take out of this no matter how many assists or points did Saras or anyone else make.. I guess your thoughts are spot on here (he should stop doing what results in turnovers).
                        on the other hand, it has been written time and time again that Saras made his name in the World on fancy, "no-look" passes. that (among other things) actually led to some huge successes over the years. that's his style, his trademark. he does it like noone else in the International arena. now good players are immitating that, but he's the original.. sure, one may presume that if the No. 1 PG in the team has a different style of passing, the players might have problems adjusting to to a backup with a more advanced (and rather unique, in a way) style
                        When you say Runi is the original fancy passer do you mean of international players or ever? Not trying to be mean, just pointing out guys like Pistol Pete were doing it before Saras was even born.


                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                          Well I didn't get to see the game or listen to the radio and hear the comments.. followed a lot tell 4th qtr on a poor play by play feed.. was not listing turn overs.. ect.... only made baskets...

                          but just some thoughts after reading the "sky is falling" which is this thread...

                          I've said it before on a earlier loss... we will not win many games if any when Baby al does not reach double figures period and/or baby al and Granger do not get close to 25 - 30 points.. especially against a top flight team. Those two have to find a way to score period even when plays aren't run for then. It's unfortunate to see Tins 3-18 he should convert better and has so far this year... but as far as shot sellection ect making bad decissions.. well I viewed the photo thread.. there is a pic of Tins taking a shot.. if this shot is indicative of the type of shots he was getting then I have no problem with him taking these kind of shots even if he's not making them... Also with this idea well just stop driving challenging the bigs becuase the ref isn't going to call a foul when you get fouled... you can not do that.. you have to continue to be aggresive. but yes one thing I do agree with about Tins he does get into the mano mano thing too much at times.... and it can hurt if he is not "making" the shot..

                          Can not comment of Jax much but it sounds like he was not putting out the effort on the defensive end like he needs to... did he get "trapped" on the offensive foul on the tins lay up.. the player catching him not paying attention and stopped in front of him causing Jax to just run him over...

                          One other thing from this game.... can most posters now agree that JO deserves to be listed as one of the top flight bigs in the game.... he clearly had a monster game on both ends... (though his blocks were down slightly) and seemed to outplay (hard to tell from just stats) Boozer who has been getting all the props for playing so well... (leading the MVP hype)

                          From what i can tell JO has outplayed ever big he's been matched up with this year, Howard, Bosh, Wallace (Detroit) and now Boozer ...

                          To me we were in trouble when Okfur (sp) hit those early three's to start the game.... that was not a good sign showed we were not ready to play solid defense... I mean you have to know he is a main thread to shoot the three, don't give the early three to a big who shoots from the outside when he's fresh and hasn't lost his legs running up and down the court yet....
                          You didn't think it was gonna be that easy, did you? ..... You know, for a second there, yeah, I kinda did.....
                          Silly rabbit..... Trix are for kids.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X