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

O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

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

  • #16
    Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
    Being a starter does not neccessarily mean a player is one of the top five on a team. To explain what I mean, a team may be rich and deep in quality guards, and not so strong up front. You can't start five guards, so that team's starting line-up may not reflect their top five players. There are also players that are simply better (for whatever reason) coming off the bench than starting.
    Yeah, I realized that after I posted. Still, I hope he realizes there's a dire need to upgrade that position, and isn't happy with Murphy just because he fits the system.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
      - To be 30th in field goal offense is alarming. If NBA teams know what you're constantly going to run, they are going to shut down your players. Hmm, I seem to remember some people arguing that consistency isn't a problem, that in the NBA every opposing team knows every play you're gonna run anyway, and it's all about execution.

      -
      I agree with you and cannot believe anyone actually believes that drivel.





















      o













      o










      o






      OK, I admit it, I've posted something just like that on many occasion. and I think I need to explain myself a little. For the record, I believe what I posted prior and I still believe it. Every team knows the opponents plays and yes it gets down to execution, but more than that it gets down to having a player or players who can just make something happen out of the "play"

      I think what O'Brien is talking about though is not running a play at all, just getting the ball up quickly and running early offense, probably off a pick and roll and allowwing our players to make something happen.

      I promise you Jim's playbook won't be nearly as thick as Rick's was, so Jim isn't going to fool anyone with some exotic play, but I expect him to allow his players to freelance a lot more within an offensive framework

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

        The answer that surprised me was the one about whether he thinks JO wants to be in Indiana. OB flat out said if he had a chance to go somewhere to try to win a title he would take it. If Kobe were saying these things, and I did not trust the fact that the team was goingto win, and if I knew he may bolt at season's end for nothing, would lead me to absolutely deal him. If Kobe is doing this next year, I would definitely deal him to the Bulls. I do have to think that the Pacers are a little worried that JO bolts, possibly to NY, who will be miraculously under the cap after 09, to sign a one year deal, then, a big FA contract. I think the interview changes nothing about JO being dealt. I think it still slightly above 50-50 that he goes, probably 60-40.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Great interview
          He comes off as candid and sincere.

          No surprise that he would start those 5 right now. We all know that typical of history Jeff hits the bench...then 3 weeks later he's brought back to the starters to shore up rebounding, even if JOB likes Troy's 3 shot. Of course Troy could do a lot to prevent that with his own toughness and I hope he does.


          Tins and JOB going good now. What if Tins continues to come late to practice though? What if Tins is taking 3 3PA a game at 29% and shooting 39% from the floor overall on 10-12 a night? What about if the defensive effort is lacking?

          I like good Tins quite a bit Able, but those questions I raise have been earned by him.



          Sorry Kegboy, but no way is JOB's bit about "if they know what's coming" as simple as "Rick's plays were obvious". No, RC was known for having a LARGE, DIFFICULT playbook, not the same 3 things over and over. The issue was that NO ONE COULD SCORE and they ended up having to go to JO all the time. You had Dun on some curls, that's 7-8 shots, Troy, Danny on some spot ups, 8 shots, Tinsley was WORTHLESS getting his own shot because he couldn't finish (and he DID get open looks for himself, he just missed them), Quis was hurt...and suddenly your offense is this - JO and Ike in the post, rinse and repeat.

          JOB is talking big right now about all this diversity and I'm certain he believes it, but turning around the team is going to take him getting some MORE from these guys than they were giving Rick last year. How is Quis going to help if he's injured for example? How is Troy going to spot up if JOB yanks him for lousy defense?


          I'm a sunshiner so I'm fine to say "screw logic, somehow it can happen, you never know".

          But the analyst in me sees the same roster from last March and wonders just where this diverse scoring is going to come from?

          Here's the list of shots people don't like from this roster:

          1) JO - turnarounds, too many jumpers, forcing into doubles too often

          2) Tinsley - anything leaving his hands

          3) Quis - anything from 3, anything from the bench while injured

          4) Dun - anything from 3, some issues at the rim too

          5) Foster - um, yeah

          6) Ike - if the ball is still in his hands when the double comes it's a turnover, otherwise great

          7) Danny - trouble going off the dribble, not fond of him spotting up at the arc too often

          8) Shawne - other than the 3 what is his offensive game right now

          9) Army - any shot he took after DEC, and that's if he's still on the team

          10) Baston - if he's here, good dunks, modest jumper, he can be part of a diverse offense actually

          11) McCleod - meh from 3, from the field a mild improvement over Tinsley

          12) Harrison - yet another post scorer IF he can get position which usually he can't (not like Ike can), most of his FGAs come from the bench after 3 quick fouls

          13) Greene - basically any jumper from him right now is a no-no


          So other than those minor issues this roster is ripe for high-scoring up-tempo (deja-vu) offense that a truly diverse system will bring, and by diverse I mean "as long as you play defense you can go take your own shot, I recommend the 3".

          I'm not even trying to bash JOB, I have hope for him, but GD can I at least get people to judge him by his history. His offenses have been blah, it's been DEFENSE that made his teams good, which sounds vaguely familiar to me...

          His last full season with Boston they scored 92.7 PPG with a 41.5 FG%. The only teams with a worse FG% that year were MIA (41.2) and DEN (41.1). The Pacers last year were dead last at 43.8% and "only" scored 95.6. Rules changes helped a little, but come on. This is NOT D'Antoni, Nellie or Flip coming on board.

          Oh by the way, that 02-03 Boston team took 2155 3PA...yes, roughly 500 more than the Pacers NBA all-time high. But don't worry, it was a clean and efficient 33.4%. No team with as low a make rate took within 1000 as many 3PAs, meaning they knew they couldn't hit it so they didn't chuck it.


          This isn't hate or love, this is just the facts. Draw whatever expectations from them you want to. I just prefer to keep expectations tied to the reality of recent history. If this team is better next year it will be directly tied to defensive improvements OR trades.
          Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-22-2007, 11:38 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

            Those Bostons teams were also fairly awful...yet he still did OK with them.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

              "I know how valuable team chemistry is to a basketball team."

              I think O'Brien is chomping at the bit to get back into coaching and the above quote is about all that I need to hear for now. A team begins and ends with "chemistry".

              Of course you have to have the talent to win but on the other hand, you can have tons of talent and without chemistry, you're going no where.
              .

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I wouldn't worry about it, every year someone new is brought in to replace Jeff and sooner or later Jeff is always back into the starting lineup - or at least getting starters minutes.
                Only during Rick's time. Bradly never got benched in favor of Foster, nor should he have. Since Rick was here, how many people replaced Jeff? Al and Murph? Al didn't work and Murphy under-performed. Not surprising. And not a ringing endorsement of Jeff IMO. And I like Foster.

                As for the interview, I liked reading what O'Brien had to say and I like the way he's coming across. If he can make keeping JO and Tinsley work more power to him. I have a small suspicion Murphy will pleasantly surprise some people next year (anyone who hasn't totally written him off, that is).

                Regarding the Free Agent, I seriously doubt it's a MLE player. Nothing suggests that to me. I think he's talking possibly about Strickland.

                And as for "execution vs. unpredictability", can't it be either one if you have the players to do it? Were the late Reggie teams really unpredictable? I don't think so. I think they just knew what the hell they were doing and could actually, you know, do it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                  Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                  - The "one guy that would really like to be here" threw up a red flag. Is he infering that JO doesn't? Is it a reference to Odom? He could just mean that, if we do ultimately trade JO, it will be because he's decided he doesn't want to be here.
                  i can't imagine this is about JO, more likely odom.

                  - "probably Jamaal (starts)." Either this means we're pursing a Point, or he knows how unpopular he is and is throwing a bone.
                  well he also mentioned playing daniels at PG so... i think you definitely say O'Neal is a starter (would a coach come in and say "Yeah, maybe we'll bench the 6-time all star." ?) and then tinsley probably because we have orien and armstrong (if options picked up) and daniels so thats a little more clear. SG, SF, PF is a clusterf#ck at the moment too. so i didn't find what he said weird at all

                  - The "top five, next five" I find troublesome. Especially when he views Murphy as one of our top five. Though him throwing Jeff in there, again, I think was a bone to the fans.
                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  He comes off as candid and sincere.

                  No surprise that he would start those 5 right now. We all know that typical of history Jeff hits the bench...then 3 weeks later he's brought back to the starters to shore up rebounding, even if JOB likes Troy's 3 shot. Of course Troy could do a lot to prevent that with his own toughness and I hope he does.
                  murphy is supposed to be a rebounder too. o'brien likes bigs that can nail threes. this shouldn't be surprising. my hope is that jeff has to stay on the bench because that means troy has returned or lived up to the rumors of a 'banger' is hitting shots and rebounding well and HOPEFULLY not royally screwing up our team defense.

                  Tins and JOB going good now. What if Tins continues to come late to practice though? What if Tins is taking 3 3PA a game at 29% and shooting 39% from the floor overall on 10-12 a night? What about if the defensive effort is lacking?

                  I like good Tins quite a bit Able, but those questions I raise have been earned by him.
                  i'm certainly no tinsley apologist. i've been pushing tins to be traded since before last season...............

                  that being said...

                  you can't deny that his relationship with carlisle got off to a 'rocky' start at best (see kenny 'krunk' anderson). i don't think carlisle EVER trusted tinsley to run the show. otherwise i fully believe carlisle would have backed off playcalling tremendously. thats not to say tinsley isn't competent or talented, rick just didn't believe he was the point guard to run the system he wanted and then slowly TPTB left rick with no other real choice by not drafting other PGs or trading away the ones rick preferred to start (anthony johnson).

                  my point is, i am willing to keep jamaal and attribute the not showing up the phantom injuries more on a terrible relationship with rick than jamaal being inept. i reserve the right to deny i ever made this statement this after december 1.

                  Sorry Kegboy, but no way is JOB's bit about "if they know what's coming" as simple as "Rick's plays were obvious". No, RC was known for having a LARGE, DIFFICULT playbook, not the same 3 things over and over. The issue was that NO ONE COULD SCORE and they ended up having to go to JO all the time. You had Dun on some curls, that's 7-8 shots, Troy, Danny on some spot ups, 8 shots, Tinsley was WORTHLESS getting his own shot because he couldn't finish (and he DID get open looks for himself, he just missed them), Quis was hurt...and suddenly your offense is this - JO and Ike in the post, rinse and repeat.

                  JOB is talking big right now about all this diversity and I'm certain he believes it, but turning around the team is going to take him getting some MORE from these guys than they were giving Rick last year. How is Quis going to help if he's injured for example? How is Troy going to spot up if JOB yanks him for lousy defense?
                  now that i look back, rick should have been fired after the new jersey series. i'm a major rick carlisle fan but when you look at what happened this season, its obvious that there has been a power struggle between him and TPTB and TPTB obviously won the p!ss!ng contest because they controlled the roster. they didn't give rick tools his offense needs to be successful and tried squeezing him into a new system by forcing players on him. suddenly mr. rick 'thickest playbook in these here united states' carlisle had an offense that essentially consisted of one play? did he suddenly become a terrible coach and lose his ability? one thing he continued to say following the GSW trade was simplifying the plays because most of his system doesn't work without quality outside shooters. all he really had was danny. he obviously didn't trust tinsley to run an offense. how did TPTB ever expect him to succeed with that roster? i think rick is an excellent coach but he obviously has a system that has been very successful so instead of trying to turn someone that is really good at something into something else (like turning garnett into a point guard) they should have just spared rick the frustration.


                  I'm a sunshiner so I'm fine to say "screw logic, somehow it can happen, you never know".

                  But the analyst in me sees the same roster from last March and wonders just where this diverse scoring is going to come from?
                  the sunshiner in me is peaking out some. and i tend to hope that with improved defense and pulling dunleavy inside the arc ala deng could show signifant improvement. plus giving troy and mike a full training camp with the team will help.
                  Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 06-22-2007, 01:20 PM.
                  This is the darkest timeline.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                    Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                    Those Bostons teams were also fairly awful...yet he still did OK with them.
                    He got A LOT out of all those guys.

                    His rotation during the ECF run was The Truth, Toine, an aging Kenny Anderson, Tony Battie, Eric Williams, Eric Strickland, a rookie Joe Johnson, Rodney Rogers, Tony Delk, Walter McCarty and future Hall of Famer Vitaly Potapenko.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                      Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                      I am concerned that he would start Murphy, that was a disaster and needs to not be repeated.
                      O'Brien is going to fall in love with Murphy if TPTB don't find a way to trade Murphy.

                      Think: Rick + Michael Curry type man-love.

                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                        Originally posted by Jay View Post
                        O'Brien is going to fall in love with Murphy if TPTB don't find a way to trade Murphy.

                        Think: Rick + Michael Curry type man-love.

                        No, I think it'd be closer to Rick + AJ man-love.

                        If we acquired 'Toine, then that would be Rick + Michael Curry man-love.

                        (I'd love to throw in Luthor Head, but I don't want this thread getting kicked to the Shout Box.)
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                          I enjoy it when OB gets interviewed.

                          He is very up front and honest it seems. More so than Larry or Donnie IMO.

                          As someone already pointed it out it sounds like Jermaine only wants a trade if we are re building or if he can go to a championship level team.

                          But lets face it, we are re buidling. This team isn't close to a championship level team. It really isn't.

                          So what teams would JO want to go to? Bulls or Cavs? Can't see us trading him within our division or conference. Maybe we would trade him to the Knicks. I'm sure he would love to play for IT again.

                          Mavs? They don't have the pieces to get Jermaine. Same with the Suns. I don't think that LA deal will be happening either.

                          Maybe this team should focus on getting Jermaine some help?

                          I think the Knicks might be the best source for that.

                          I think we need a player who can share the scoring load. They have 3 guys who can do that and atleast one of them should be avaliable. Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, or Jamal Crawford. Any one of those three i'd take. I think Crawford probably won't be traded. Don't know that IT would take Tinsley/Foster for either Marbury or Francis so IDK.

                          Mike Bibby would be perfect for us right now. But I don't know that we have the pieces to get him from Sacramento. They probably would want a young player or a pick, something we don't have to offer right now.

                          I really think that if this team is serious about winning with Jermaine we have to go out and get someone who can score 20 points from the outside to complament Jermaine. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Bibby, Marbury, Francis, Ray Allen, whoever. We can't rely on Danny Granger to do it. We just can't.

                          Gerald Wallace and Mike Miller are a couple of other guys who might be able to do the trick but IDK how we could get either of them.

                          Either trade Jermaine and go out and get one a player to help him score. These players that can get 10-15 points aren't going to it. Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley, and Granger are all capable of 10-15 per night but we need someone who can score more like 20 a night.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                            I really don't even take this in, I guess you could put it like that.

                            "I have a sense that the odds are against the fact that Jermaine O'Neal will be traded. It's just reality. . . . With that in mind, I'm playing the odds. I'm planning on coaching him."

                            That statement to me just says, "yeah, it's hard to trade a superstar and I'm going to coach him if he is still on my team next season."

                            I just don't understand what other websites are going crazy about. He didn't even say anything...
                            I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                              I appreciate the fact that via this interview, the Pacers finally have something to say to their fans. I agree with the comments that JOB seems to be sincere and in a mood for straight talk. That's all to the good. I remained concerned, all the same, that he's going to run a first-over-the-line heaves up a three (a low percentage shot on any team and especially on a team with few if any three point shooters). His point that JO is likely to be here next season is probably right. JO has more value in the minds of the Pacers and their fans than he has throughout the league. He hasn't played on a winning team in two years, he's frequently injured, doesn't make teamates better, has no leadership skills, and doesn't lead the league in any statistical categories. Oh, yes, he's paid about $5 million more than he's worth. Yes, it's unlikely he's going to be traded.

                              JOB seems to value JT and he just might be right about him. Let's face it, JT and Rick got off to a very poor start Rick's first year and the 'chemistry' between them was not healthy ever since. Still, we don't have a decent backup, and the fact's are, JT will probably miss 15 games, and he'll will play an average of 35 mpg. Armstrong is interesting for an old man but he's not the answer.

                              I'm disturbed with the comment about 'starting' Murphy. If our defense is going to improve (i.e., defensive rebounds), Murphy shouldn't play more than 5 mpg.

                              All in all, I would have preferred that JOB said something like no one has a starter job until they come to camp and win the job -- JO included. He's already showing favorites and in the end, this will wreck any chance for better chemistry. Put me in the 'still skeptical' category.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: O'Brien expects he will be coaching O'Neal next season

                                Originally posted by madison View Post
                                All in all, I would have preferred that JOB said something like no one has a starter job until they come to camp and win the job -- JO included. He's already showing favorites and in the end, this will wreck any chance for better chemistry. Put me in the 'still skeptical' category.
                                see i don't buy that. you're coming in to coach a team with a 6-time all star and then you're supposed to say that guy doesn't earn a spot on the starting lineup? i find it disingenuous when coaches try to float stuff like that as legit. i think it makes plenty of sense what he has said for the reasons you outlined about JT probably starting. right now, who else WOULD start there? but we have a bunch of players at SF/PF that we're trying to fit into SG SF and C. which is why he doesn't have definite answers. so i don't see it as playing favorites, he barely knows these players personally. i would say that he's giving a fairly honest answer about the starting lineup.
                                This is the darkest timeline.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X